ReviewHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2026
Rectus diastasis is not a single entity: phenotype-specific controversies in surgical management.
Review in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRectus diastasis (RD) is increasingly treated by general, abdominal wall and plastic surgeons, but controversies persist because clinically distinct phenotypes are often analysed together. This critical narrative review re-examines surgical management of RD through a phenotype-specific framework.
methodsPubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for English-language studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, consensus statements and guidelines addressing adult RD management. Evidence was interpreted by phenotype, anatomical severity, associated hernia status, operative goal and outcome domain rather than pooled quantitatively.
resultsRD should not be considered a single operative problem. Postpartum women commonly present with core instability, back pain, pelvic floor symptoms, skin redundancy and aesthetic concerns, whereas male or obesity-associated patients more often present with concomitant midline hernia and potentially different abdominal wall mechanics. This distinction alters the relevance of conservative treatment, suture plication, mesh-suture or planar mesh reinforcement, abdominoplasty-based repair and minimally invasive surgery. Available comparative data support the feasibility of both suture and mesh-supported repair in selected patients, but evidence remains limited by short follow-up, heterogeneous recurrence definitions and inadequate aesthetic outcome reporting.
conclusionThe central unresolved controversy is not which technique is best for RD in general, but which technique is best for which phenotype and treatment goal. Future studies should stratify patients by sex, parity, tissue compliance, diastasis width, hernia status, skin-adipose excess, body mass index or weight-loss history, and functional versus aesthetic indication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42446578What 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.