ArticleJournal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS2025
Prophylactic Retrorectus Mesh Versus Small-Stitch Closure After Emergency Midline Laparotomy: 2-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04311788 (Preemer Trial - Prophylactic Mesh Versus no Mesh in the Midline Emergency Laparotomy Closure for Prevention of Incisional Hernia), which is not on this 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.
Preemer Trial - Prophylactic Mesh Versus no Mesh in the Midline Emergency Laparotomy Closure for Prevention of Incisional Hernia: a Multi Center, Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prophylactic mesh reinforcement at emergency midline laparotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis with pre-specified subgroup analysis of contaminated and dirty abdominal wounds (CDC Class III-IV).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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Incisional hernias (IH) are common complications following emergency midline laparotomies. Mesh reinforcement has shown efficacy in preventing incisional hernias in elective surgeries, but evidence remains limited for emergency midline incisions. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of retrorectus placement of a self-gripping polyester mesh in preventing incisional hernia after emergency midline laparotomy, as measured by the incidence of IH, postoperative complications, quality of life, and health economic outcomes. Methods: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, adult patients undergoing emergency midline laparotomy were randomized to receive either prophylactic retrorectus mesh or standard 4:1 small-stitch fascial closure using a slowly absorbable monofilament suture. The primary outcome was the radiological/clinical IH rate within 2 years after the surgery. Secondary outcomes were complications, reoperations, quality of life, and health-economic measures. Blinding was maintained for patients, outcome assessors, and radiologists. Due to difficulties in recruitment, the study was prematurely terminated prior to reaching the aimed number of patients. Results: Out of 925 patients screened, 109 were randomized, and 72 received the allocated intervention. At 2-year's follow-up, one (4%) asymptomatic incisional hernia was detected in the control group compared to none in mesh group. In the mesh group, three (9%) patients experienced mesh-related complications: one (5%) retrorectus hematoma, one (5%) internal hernia and one (5%) postoperative seroma. One (5%) additional patient in the mesh group developed a fistula requiring mesh removal. No significant differences were found in early postoperative complications or quality of life between groups. Conclusion: Retrorectus mesh reinforcement did not reduce the incidence of incisional hernia compared to standard small-stitch closure in this trial. However, mesh-related complications were observed. Due to recruitment challenges and limited sample size, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04311788?term=preemer&rank=1, NCT04311788.
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.