Systematic review and meta-regression of factors affecting midline incisional hernia rates: analysis of 14 618 patients

Krieg, Andreas, Bosanquet, David C. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2304-0489, Ansell, James, Abdelrahman, Tarig, Cornish, Julie ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4360-4472, Harries, Rhiannon, Stimpson, Amy, Davies, Llion, Glasbey, James, Frewer, Kathryn A., Frewer, Natasha, Russell, Daphne, Russell, Ian and Torkington, Jared 2015. Systematic review and meta-regression of factors affecting midline incisional hernia rates: analysis of 14 618 patients. PLoS ONE 10 (9) , pp. 1-18. 10.1371/journal.pone.0138745

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Background The incidence of incisional hernias (IHs) following midline abdominal incisions is difficult to estimate. Furthermore recent analyses have reported inconsistent findings on the superiority of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures. Objective To estimate the mean IH rate following midline laparotomy from the published literature, to identify variables that predict IH rates and to analyse whether the type of suture (absorbable versus non-absorbable) affects IH rates. Methods We undertook a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We sought randomised trials and observational studies including patients undergoing midline incisions with standard suture closure. Papers describing two or more arms suitable for inclusion had data abstracted independently for each arm. Results Fifty-six papers, describing 83 separate groups comprising 14 618 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of IHs after midline incision was 12.8% (range: 0 to 35.6%) at a weighted mean of 23.7 months. The estimated risk of undergoing IH repair after midline laparotomy was 5.2%. Two meta-regression analyses (A and B) each identified seven characteristics associated with increased IH rate: one patient variable (higher age), two surgical variables (surgery for AAA and either surgery for obesity surgery (model A) or using an upper midline incision (model B)), two inclusion criteria (including patients with previous laparotomies and those with previous IHs), and two circumstantial variables (later year of publication and specifying an exact significance level). There was no significant difference in IH rate between absorbable and non-absorbable sutures either alone or in conjunction with either regression analysis. Conclusions The IH rate estimated by pooling the published literature is 12.8% after about two years. Seven factors account for the large variation in IH rates across groups. However there is no evidence that suture type has an intrinsic effect on IH rates.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Medicine
Subjects:	R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
Publisher:	Public Library of Science
ISSN:	1932-6203
Date of Acceptance:	3 September 2013
Last Modified:	21 Jun 2024 01:10
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/84641

Citation Data

Cited 160 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item