Trial reportLangenbeck's archives of surgery2025
Interim analysis of single - centre randomised controlled trial on incisional hernia repair with vs without synthetic mesh fixation.
Trial report in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Is mesh fixation necessary in open retromuscular ventral hernia repair? A meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn a prospective randomised trial, we aimed to compare incisional hernia repair with mesh fixation versus incisional hernia repair without mesh fixation.
methodsThe study was performed from June 2018 to August 2024 at a single centre in Vilnius, Lithuania. Fifty-seven patients with incisional abdominal wall hernia were randomly included into two groups: group one-"sublay" hernia repair with mesh fixation and the second - without mesh fixation. The duration of surgery, hospital stay, pain levels, quality of life and rate of complications were compared.
resultsOf the 38 women and 19 men who were included in the study, 30 were with mesh fixation and 27 without mesh fixation. The median patient's body mass index was 31.57 ± 5.96 (19.5-49.6). The most common hernia width was W2 according to the European Hernia Society (EHS) classification. A significant difference between the groups was found in duration of surgery - 108.00 ± 47.35 (40-235) minutes in the mesh fixation group vs. 75.74 ± 30.25 (35-150)-without the mesh fixation group (p < 0.05). A higher pain level was observed on the 10th postoperative day-3.03 ± 2.54 in the mesh fixation group versus 1.67 ± 2.22 in the group without the mesh fixation group (p < 0.05). A statistically significant difference was also observed in seroma rate after 6 months (16.6% versus 0%, p < 0.05). There have been no hernia recurrences in either group so far.
conclusionsNo mesh fixation on "sublay" hernia repair does not worsen the patient's postoperative condition. It does not increase postoperative pain, worsen the quality of life, or increase the risk of postoperative complications. On the 10th postoperative day, the non-fixed mesh group had less postoperative pain, however, later the pain was equal. A lower number of seromas was also observed in this group after 6 months. However, the operative time in the group without mesh fixation was significantly shorter.
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.