ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Comparative outcomes of SCOM/SCOLA vs. IPOM PLUS in Umbilical and para-umbilical hernia repairs.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Umbilical and para-umbilical hernias are common abdominal wall defects, often requiring surgical intervention to prevent complications. The Subcutaneous Onlay Laparoscopic Approach (SCOM/SCOLA) and Laparoscopic Intraperitoneal Onlay Repair Plus (IPOM PLUS) are two laparoscopic techniques employed for hernia repair. This study aims to compare these two methods based on surgical time, postoperative pain, seroma formation, hospital stay, and overall cost to guide the selection of appropriate treatment strategies. Methods: This prospective observational study included 60 adult patients with umbilical or para-umbilical hernias treated at a tertiary care hospital between February 2022 and December 2022. Patients were divided equally into two groups, with 30 undergoing IPOM PLUS and 30 receiving SCOM/SCOLA. Surgical outcomes were evaluated based on duration of surgery, postoperative pain scores, seroma formation during the first and third weeks, hospital stay length, and overall cost of care. Statistical comparisons were performed using appropriate tests with Results: IPOM PLUS demonstrated a significantly shorter mean surgical time (79.13 ± 12.73 min) compared to SCOM/SCOLA (94.53 ± 21.25 min, Conclusion: Both IPOM PLUS and SCOM/SCOLA are effective surgical techniques with distinct advantages. IPOM PLUS provides faster surgical times, shorter hospital stays, and fewer complications, making it ideal for patients needing rapid recovery. In contrast, SCOM/SCOLA offers better postoperative pain relief and cost-effectiveness per procedure but carries a higher risk of seroma and longer hospital stays. Tailoring the choice of surgical technique to individual patient needs and clinical circumstances can optimize outcomes and resource utilization.
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.