ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Primary umbilical hernia repair: does suture type matter?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUmbilical hernias are a common surgical pathology. Umbilical hernias 2 cm or less are generally treated with open primary suture repair with associated risk of recurrence up to 27 percent. A variety of suture and repair techniques are used with little evidence to suggest which provides the lowest risk of recurrence. The primary goal of our study is to evaluate recurrence rates between primary umbilical hernia repairs with braided and monofilament suture.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of primary umbilical hernia repairs in patients over the age of 18 performed at a single institution by a group of ten surgeons from November 2018 to November 2023. The primary outcome was comparison of recurrence rates between braided and monofilament suture. Secondary outcomes include recurrence rate of monofilament absorbable versus permanent repair, recurrence rate by repair method, rates of wound infection and suture granulomas.
resultsWe evaluated 797 patients that met inclusion criteria with a mean age of 50.9 years, mean BMI 29.6, mean CCI 1.64, and 77% male. We had a 46-month average follow-up via chart review. Mean hernia size was 1.11 cm. 86.4% were repaired with braided (Ethibond) and 13.6% with monofilament (PDS or Prolene) suture. Recurrence rate was 3.9% versus 5.6% for braided and monofilament, respectively, with no significant difference. The incidence of wound complications was not significant between the two groups. There was an increased recurrence rate using the pants over vest repair technique.
conclusionOur study indicates that the type of suture used in primary umbilical hernia repairs does not significantly impact the rates of recurrence, wound infection, or suture granuloma formation. However, the pants-over-vest technique is associated with a higher recurrence rate.
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.