ArticleCureus2026
Open Ventral Hernia Repair: A Prospective Comparative Analysis of Onlay Versus Sublay Mesh Placement.
Article in Cureus, 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
backgroundVentral hernia repair is among the most frequently performed general surgical procedures worldwide. Mesh-based repair has become the standard of care, but the optimal plane for mesh placement remains debated. This study compares outcomes of onlay and sublay techniques in open ventral hernia repair.
methodsA prospective observational study enrolled 62 patients (31 per group) undergoing elective open ventral hernia repair at a tertiary care institute in India over 18 months. Postoperative wound complications (seroma, surgical site infection (SSI)), operative duration, hospital stay, and pain scores (Visual Analog Scale, postoperative days (POD) 1, 3, 5) were compared. Statistical analysis used the Mann-Whitney U test, the Chi-square/Fisher exact tests, and binary logistic regression (SPSS Statistics version 30 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA)).
resultsGroups were comparable in age (onlay 51.3±14.2 vs sublay 51.7±11.0 years; p = 0.897), gender, body-mass index (BMI), and comorbidities. Seroma occurred significantly more often in the onlay group (32.3% vs 3.2%; p = 0.003). SSI rates were higher in onlay patients (25.8% vs 16.1%) but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.349). Operative time was significantly shorter in the onlay group (94.4 vs 126.7 minutes; p<0.001). Onlay patients had less pain on POD 1 (p = 0.042). Median hospital stay was similar (9 vs 8 days; p = 0.155). No hematoma, mesh infection, or wound dehiscence occurred in either group. Subcutaneous fat thickness was an independent predictor of seroma (p = 0.026).
conclusionBoth techniques are safe for open ventral hernia repair. Sublay mesh placement significantly reduces seroma formation and trends toward fewer SSIs, while onlay repair offers a shorter operative time and less immediate postoperative pain. Surgical decision-making should be individualized based on anatomical factors, comorbidities, and intraoperative findings.
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.