ReviewJournal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS2025
Adhesions After Laparoscopic IPOM-How Serious Is the Problem?
Review in Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Minimally invasive versus open surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Recurrence rate and mesh bulging are reduced with primary fascial closure in ventral hernia repair: the PROSECO randomized clinical trial.The British journal of surgery · 2025Trial
- The concept of Laparoscopic Intracorporeal Rectus Aponeuroplasty (LIRA) technique in complex abdominal hernias based on size and location.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Emergency laparoscopic "hybrid" intraperitoneal on-lay mesh (IPOM +) repair of incarcerated umbilical hernia in patient with BMI 62 and small bowel obstruction; a case based review.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Review
- Smoking cessation and weight loss before ventral hernia repair - can we really justify this? A single center cohort study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic ventral TAPP versus IPOM for primary umbilical hernia repair: why use a sledgehammer to crack a nut?Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although laparoscopic IPOM is still the gold standard in ventral hernia repair, it is subject of a slow but constant decline, while new minimally invasive techniques are increasingly used, as well as open retromuscular repairs. One of the reasons are the intraperitoneal mesh position and its suspected higher risk for creating intraabdominal adhesions, compared to extraperitoneal mesh positions. In potential subsequent operations (e.g., in recurrent ventral hernia repair) adhesions usually must be taken down, which is a known risk factor for complications such as inadvertent enterotomies, surgical site infections and prolonged hospital stay. In this review we evaluate the incidence of intraabdominal adhesions after ventral hernia repair and their potential impact on surgical outcome in subsequent operations. Special attention is paid to the impact of mesh position in developing adhesions.
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.