ReviewEuropean urology open science2026
Incisional Hernia After Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review.
Review in European urology open science, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Incisional hernia (IH) is an under-recognized complication after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP). Methods: We performed a systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to evaluate the proportion, risk factors, and surgical determinants of IH after MIRP. Results: Sixteen studies published between 2010 and 2025 were included, encompassing 56 661 patients. Most were retrospective cohorts, with heterogeneous definitions and diagnostic methods. The reported proportion of IH ranged from 0.04% to 31%, with a median time to diagnosis of 14 mo. Repair was required in up to 80% of cases, and emergency repair in up to 15%. Two comparative studies directly evaluating specimen extraction site consistently reported lower proportions of IH with transverse suprapubic (Pfannenstiel) extraction than with periumbilical extraction, while three registry-based studies similarly reported lower proportions following open compared with MIRP. Evidence regarding the influence of fascial incision orientation on reported IH occurrence was mixed, whereas no clear difference was reported between midline and off-midline extraction sites. Reported factors associated with IH included advanced age, obesity, larger prostate volume, postoperative parietal abscess, and prior abdominal surgery. Limitations include the heterogeneity in the studies included. Conclusions: These findings highlight IH as a clinically meaningful complication of MIRP. Reported IH occurrence differed by specimen extraction site in the available observational studies, but the evidence remains limited by heterogeneous definitions, follow-up, and risk of bias. Preventive strategies, including the site of specimen extraction, warrant further prospective evaluation.
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.