Observational studyUpdates in surgery2026
The choice of extraction site modulates the incidence of incisional hernia in colorectal surgery: a cohort analysis.
Observational study in Updates in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Barbed continuous suture reduces the risk of specimen extraction site hernia in high-risk obese patients: a CT-based analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Article
- Improving cost-efficiency in port-site fascial closure: a novel Veress-needle technique and a comprehensive literature review.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Surgeons' practices and preferences for performing right hemicolectomy for colorectal cancer: results from the SuPrHem survey.Updates in surgery · 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
Although minimally invasive surgery has significantly reduced the incidence of incisional hernia (IH) in colorectal procedures, the choice of specimen extraction site continues to pose a risk. This study explores how the location of extraction site influences the occurrence of IH in patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal resections. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study involving consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive colorectal resection for colorectal cancer from 2013 to 2021. Patients with open surgery, previous hernia repair, reoperations during the study period or without imaging follow-up were excluded. The primary outcome measured was the CT-proven incidence of IH at the extraction site. A total of 191 patients were analyzed. Among them, 113 patients (59.2%) had a midline extraction site, while and 78 patients (40.8%) had an off-midline extraction. Midline extraction was preferably used during right and transverse colectomy (98% and 100% respectively), whereas off-midline were preferred in left hemicolectomy, sigmoidectomy, and anterior resection (55%, 88%, 95% respectively). Remarkably, the overall incidence of IH at the extraction site was 30.9% for midline extractions compared to 0% for off-midline extractions (p value < 0.001). The mean follow-up duration was of 3.3 ± 2.1 years. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed midline extraction as a significant risk factor for IH with a relative risk of 29.1 (95% CI 3.8-220.5, p value < 0.001). The findings highlight a substantial increase in the risk of IH associated with midline extraction sites. As such, it is crucial to advocate for fully minimally invasive colorectal resection using off-midline incision to enhance patient outcomes and reduce the risk of incisional hernias.
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.