SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025
Prevalence and risk factors of incisional hernia after ileostomy reversal: meta-analysis with meta-regression.
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 2 papers.
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.
- Prevention of incisional hernia in ileostomy reversal. 5-year follow-up prospective randomized controlled trial.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Trial
- Risk factors for stoma-site incisional hernia after ileostomy reversal: impact of fascial suture material.Surgery today · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rate of incisional hernia (IH) at stoma site after ileostomy closure is controversial in the literature. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of IH at stoma site after ileostomy reversal and to determine its risk factors. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe performed a systematic review according to PRISMA standards to identify studies reporting prevalence of IH after ileostomy closure. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate its rate. Heterogeneity was explained by meta-regression and subgroup analysis.
resultsTwenty studies were included with 2629 patients. The pooled estimated rate was 13,7% with a 95% confidence interval (11-17%). The 95% prediction interval varied between 5,3% and 31,1%, which showed substantial heterogeneity. Meta-regression showed that ASA score III and IV increases IH rate (p = 0,02). Obese and elderly patients have a tendency for developing IH with substantial heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis for COPD, diabetes mellitus, smoking, laparotomy approach for the initial surgery, did not show statistically significant differences.
conclusionPrevalence of IH is higher than previously estimated in the literature. ASA score III and IV increases its rate. Prospective randomized studies focusing on the impact of prophylactic mesh implementation are necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40522527What 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.