SynthesisBMC surgery2025
Onlay repair for abdominal wall hernias: a valid alternative. Systematic review and comparison with international standards.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ventral hernias are a common surgical challenge for general surgeons and several techniques have been described to repair it. The mesh positioning for the repair is a factor frequently mentioned as a major contributor to the outcome of the operation. Although onlay mesh repair is considered the simplest approach for ventral hernia repair, recent studies have led to its stigmatization. Even so, it could still be a reasonable option.
objectiveto evaluate the complications and recurrences documented with this technique and compare them to international quality standards for ventral hernia repair outcomes.
methodSystematic review of the literature using PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE, following PRISMA criteria. Search terms "onlay hernia repair", from January 2020 to October 2024. The results were evaluated and compared to standard international results. The following data were extracted: MINORS criteria, number of patients, age, body mass index, comorbidities, variables related to hernia characteristics, including prior surgical repair, defect diameter, classification, surgical complications, including general complications, surgical site infections, seromas, hematomas, death, recurrence, and the follow-up period.
resultsTen papers were analyzed, including 910 patients. The average age among the patients was 55.6 years, and 39.4% of the sample population was male. Their mean BMI was 31.4, and 36% had been diagnosed with cardiovascular disease. The incisional hernias were 74.6%, with 285 patients with midline hernias. The hernia defect diameter was 6.4 cm. The surgical complications: infections 10.1%, seroma 11.8%, hematoma 2,8%, wound dehiscence 4.4%, mortality 0.78%, recurrence 5.4% with median follow-up of 12 months.
conclusionsThe results of this review compared to international standards for hernia repair, show that onlay mesh appears is a suitable option for ventral hernia surgery, with low recurrence, complications and mortality rates. However, there is missing information in patient's comorbidities, hernia characteristics, and complications, emphasize the importance of structured and systematic methodologies in future research.
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.