Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40227366›Full record

SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025

IPOM versus eTEP as minimally invasive approaches for ventral/incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yeong Huei Desmond Chuah, Angus Lloyd, Shaheel Mohammad Sahebally

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yeong Huei Desmond ChuahDepartment of General and Colorectal Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, D24 NR0A, Ireland. desmondchuah@rcsi.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5473-673X
Angus LloydDepartment of General and Colorectal Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, D24 NR0A, Ireland.
Shaheel Mohammad SaheballyDepartment of General and Colorectal Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, D24 NR0A, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEnhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) repair of ventral hernias is an emerging modality that places synthetic mesh in the retrorectus space and obviates its fixation. We aimed to compare outcomes between eTEP and minimally invasive intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair techniques.

methodsA PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis searching PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases from January 2010 till August 2024, was performed. All studies comparing IPOM versus eTEP were included. The primary objective was postoperative pain at day 7 (POD7) whereas secondary objectives included operative time, length of stay (LOS), intraoperative and postoperative complications and recurrence. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. Sensitivity analyses were also performed.

resultsTwelve studies (3 randomized, 9 observational) capturing 868 patients (452 IPOM, 416 eTEP) were included. Most hernias were primary ventral (n = 806). Most studies (10/12) adopted a laparoscopic approach whilst two employed robotic techniques. IPOM was associated with significantly higher pain scores at POD7 (VAS; visual analog scale; MD 3.01, 95%CI = 1.28-4.75, p = 0.0007), longer LOS (MD 0.65 days, 95%CI = 0.27-1.04, p = 0.001) but shorter operative time (MD - 53.69 min, 95%CI = - 69.65- - 37.73, p < 0.00001). However, there was no differences in intraoperative (OR 2.04, 95%CI = 0.81-5.17, p = 0.13), postoperative (OR 1.15, 95%CI = 0.54-2.46, p = 0.72) complications or recurrence (OR 2.08, 95%CI = 0.79-5.46, p = 0.14). On sensitivity analyses, comparing laparoscopic IPOM with defect closure (IPOM +) versus eTEP, similar results prevailed.

conclusionsIPOM(+) is associated with more postoperative pain at one week and a longer hospital stay. However, no differences were observed in complications or recurrence between the two techniques.

Indexed as

Hernia, VentralHerniorrhaphyIncisional HerniaLaparoscopySurgical MeshHumansLength of StayMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresOperative TimePostoperative PainRecurrenceAbdominal wall herniaETEPIPOMMinimally invasiveVentral

Identifiers

PMID40227366
PMCPMC11996944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.