ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery2025
Comparative evaluation of enhanced total extraperitoneal repair and intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair-plus for ventral hernias: A randomised controlled study.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Outcomes after extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) repair for ventral hernia with or without posterior rectus sheath closure: systematic review.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM Plus) and extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP RS) repair for incisional hernia - a randomized clinical trial.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVentral hernia repair techniques have evolved, with enhanced total extraperitoneal repair (eTEP) and intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair-plus (IPOM+) emerging as alternatives. While eTEP avoids complications such as adhesions and infections associated with intraperitoneal mesh placement, its effectiveness compared to IPOM+ remains debated. To compare the outcomes of eTEP and IPOM+ in primary midline ventral hernia repair, focusing on post-operative pain, complications and early recurrence rates. PATIENTS AND
methodsA randomised controlled study was conducted in a tertiary hospital in Delhi from August 2022 to February 2024. Forty-eight patients with primary midline ventral hernias (defect size: 2-6 cm) were randomised into eTEP ( n = 24) and IPOM+ ( n = 24) groups. Outcomes included operative time, pain scores (evaluated at 6 h, 24 h, 7 days, 1 month and 3 months), analgesic use, complications (seroma and surgical site infections) and recurrence rates.
resultseTEP had significantly longer operative time (115.83 ± 36.30 min vs. 63.94 ± 10.94 min; P < 0.001) but significantly lower pain scores at 6 and 24 h ( P < 0.001). Analgesic requirements were reduced in the eTEP group, with only two patients requiring rescue analgesia compared to 20 in the IPOM+ group ( P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in seroma rates, surgical site infections or recurrence at 3 months.
conclusionseTEP offers reduced early post-operative pain and lower analgesic use compared to IPOM+, with similar complication and recurrence rates. Despite longer operative times, eTEP provides a viable alternative for ventral hernia repair with potential quality-of-life benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.