The ideal location for mesh placement in open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) remains under debate. Current trends lean toward underlay or sublay repair. We hypothesize that in patients undergoing OVHR, sublay versus underlay placement of mesh results in fewer surgical site infections (SSIs) and recurrences.
A multi-institution database of all OVHRs performed from 2010 to 2011 was accessed. Patients with mesh placed in the sublay or underlay position and at least 1 mo of follow-up were included. Primary outcome was SSI. Secondary outcome was hernia recurrence. Multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression for SSI and Cox regression for recurrence. Subgroup analysis of elective, midline ventral incisional hernias was also performed.
Of 447 patients, 139 (31.1%) had a sublay repair. The unadjusted analysis showed no difference in SSI and lower recurrence using sublay compared with underlay. On multivariate analysis, there was no difference in SSI using sublay compared with underlay (odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-2.8). Recurrence was less common with sublay (hazard ratio 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.8). On subgroup analysis of elective, midline incisional hernias only (n = 247), there were more SSIs with sublay compared with underlay repair (28.0% versus 15.1%, P = 0.018); however, there was no difference in major SSI (sublay 9.3% versus underlay 5.8%, P = 0.315). There were fewer recurrences using sublay repair compared with underlay repair (10.7% versus 25.0%, P = 0.010).
In this multi-center, risk-adjusted study, sublay repair was associated with fewer recurrences than underlay repair and no difference in SSI. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate these findings.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 December 2015.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Surgical Research
#5,204
of 5,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#324,651
of 380,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Surgical Research
#96
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,778 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 380,095 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
