==== Front Sci Rep Sci Rep Scientific Reports 2045-2322 Nature Publishing Group UK London 77976 10.1038/s41598-020-77976-1 Article Incisional hernia after surgical correction of abdominal congenital anomalies in infants: a systematic review with meta-analysis https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1069-7062Eeftinck Schattenkerk Laurens D. l.d.eeftinkckschattenkerk@amsterdamumc.nl 12 Musters Gijsbert D. 1 Nijssen David J. 1 de Jonge Wouter J. 23 de Vries Ralph 4 van Heurn L. W. Ernest 12 Derikx Joep PM. 12 1 grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Paediatric Surgery, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1005 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 grid.7177.60000000084992262Tytgat Institute for Liver and Intestinal Research, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3 grid.15090.3d0000 0000 8786 803XDepartment of General, Visceral-, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany 4 grid.12380.380000 0004 1754 9227Medical Library, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3 12 2020 3 12 2020 2020 10 2117015 5 2020 4 11 2020 © The Author(s) 2020Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.Incisional hernia (IH) in children could result in life-threatening complications, including incarceration and bowel strangulation. The incidence and risk factors of IH in infants are scarcely reported. Since IH-correction may require extensive surgery and a long recovery program, identifying infants and birth defects at risk, may lead to a different approach during the primary surgery. Therefore, the aim of this review is to systematically review the available data on the incidence of IH following surgery for congenital anomalies in infants. All studies describing IH were considered eligible. PubMed and Embase were searched and risk of bias was assessed. Primary outcome was the incidence of IH, secondary outcomes were difference in IH occurrence between disease severity (complex vs simple) and closure method (SILO vs primary closure) in gastroschisis patients. A meta-analysis was performed to pool the reported incidences in total and per congenital anomaly separately. Subgroup analysis within gastroschisis articles was performed. The 50 included studies represent 3140 patients. The pooled proportion of IH was 0.03 (95% CI 0.02–0.05; I2 = 79%, p ≤ 0.01) all anomalies combined. Gastroschisis (GS) reported highest pooled proportion 0.10 (95% CI 0.06–0.17; n = 142/1273; I2 = 86%; p ≤ 0.01). SILO closure (OR 3.09) and simple gastroschisis, i.e. without additional anomalies, (OR 0.18) were of significant influence. This review reports the incidence of IH in infants with different congenital abdominal anomalies, of which gastroschisis reported the highest risk. In GS patients, complex GS and SILO closure are risk factors for IH development. Subject terms DiseasesGastroenterologyHealth careRisk factorsissue-copyright-statement© The Author(s) 2020 ==== Body Introduction Incisional hernia (IH) is a dreaded complication after abdominal surgery in children. It may result in serious life-threatening complications, including incarceration and bowel strangulation1,2. In addition, it is is a burden on the quality of life and may affect the development of the child3,4. The incidence and risk factors of IH in neonates are scarcely reported and therefore surgeons often refer to studies done in the adult population. For obvious reasons though, taking measures to prevent smoking and obesity in the infantile cohort would not aid in lowering IH rate5. The studies that do report IH in the paediatric population reported an incidence between 0.7 and 3.2%6–9. During the last decades major advancements have been made in the postnatal care of neonates with congenital anomalies. Those developments, such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and total parenteral nutrition, have increased survival of this crucial period10. Because more neonates survive, there has been an increase in abdominal paediatric surgery procedures10,11. As the total numbers of abdominal procedures rises, an increase in total accounts of IH is also to be expected. IH correction may require extensive surgery and a long recovery program. Identifying infants and birth defects at risk, may lead to a different approach during the primary surgery. Therefore, the aim of this review is to estimate the incidence of incisional hernia following surgery for congenital anomalies in infants (less than 2 years of age) with a systematic review. Methods Studies were selected according to the criteria outlined below based on the PRISMA Guidelines12. Our protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 7 March 2019 (registration number: CRD42019119268). Participants All studies reporting on IH after surgical correction of abdominal congenital anomalies in infants were considered for this review. Studies reporting on other complications, animal studies, in vitro studies, non-English, conference abstracts and studies with less than ten cases were excluded. Search strategy The electronic databases of the National Institutes of Health PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched in February 2020 using both simple search terms as well as hierarchical family forms (e.g. MESH). The clinical data expert (RV) aided in the formation of the search strategy. The search combined four groups of search terms and their equivalents: (1) terms related to the age at the moment of surgery (e.g. neonate); (2) terms related to the location of surgery (e.g. abdominal surgery); (3) terms related to congenital abdominal defects (e.g. omphalocele); (4) terms related to incisional hernia (e.g. cicatricial hernia). Mesh and search terms used in PubMed are included in Appendix 1. Primary and secondary outcomes The primary endpoint was the pooled percentage of IH. Secondary endpoint included the pooled percentage per congenital anomaly and identification of possible risk factors such as surgical procedure and disease severity by means . A Forest plot, containing the estimated overall pooled proportion of IH and the corresponding 95% CI was created using Graphpad Prism version 8. In the Forest plot we also reported the pooled proportion and CI per anomaly if; (1) IH was reported in at least three studies for the anomaly OR (2) if the total number of patients all studies on an anomaly combined was ≥ 100 patients; (3) there was at least one event of IH present all studies on a specific anomaly combined. If these criteria were not met the anomaly was reported under the forest plot as residual. These residuals were still included in the analysis for overall pooled proportions. For all studies with multiple arms, data of both trial-arms were combined or, if only one arm matched the inclusion criteria, the appropriate arm was used. Additional extracted parameters were: author, country of conduct, year of publication, journal, study design, duration of follow-up, duration of study, number of participants, type of congenital anomaly, subdivision within anomaly, time to IH, repeat surgery because of IH, history of stoma data was extracted on. Duration of follow up was described as median with range, mean with/without standard deviation or citated text following each article’s own description. Duration was either reported in month or years recalculated from the reported value if necessary. For studies describing gastroschisis, type of closure (by SILO or primary) and severity of disease (complex or simple) was noted following definitions used by the author. Studies deemed gastroschisis complex when a patient had additional anomalies, such as intestinal atresia. If the patient only suffered from a gastroschisis, it was accepted as simple gastroschisis. Data extraction Titles and abstracts were screened by two independent authors (LES, DN) using Rayyan. Rayyan is an online based software that facilitates blind collaboration among reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by discussion between the two review authors. A third specialist author (JD or GM) was consulted if consensus was not reached. Afterwards the full text of the remaining articles was read to determine eligibility for inclusion (LES, DN). If the full text was not found the authors were contacted. Of the included articles the reference list was cross-checked to find any additional articles. Validity and eligibility assessment All included articles were assessed for the methodological quality and risk of bias using the Newcastle Ottawa quality assessment scale13. LES and DN did the assessment separately. Data synthesis For each study, a weighted average of the logit proportions of IH was determined by the use of the generic inverse variance method. The logit proportions were back transformed to the summary estimate and 95% CIs were obtained in a summary proportion representing the pooled proportion of the IH. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 and χ2 statistics. Analysis was performed using R-studio version 3.6.1 (package “meta” (Schwarzer, 2007) and “metaprop” (Viachtbauer, 2010)). The random-effects model was used for interpretation. Heterogeneity was deemed significant if the pooled data’s p value was < 0.05 or χ2 statistics were ≥ 75. Heterogeneity was interpreted as small (I2 ≤ 0.25), medium (I2 = 0.25–0.50) or strong (I2 ≥ 0.50), according to Higgins14. The gastroschisis subgroup analysis were performed using review manager (version 5.3) to generate forest plots. In this part of the meta-analysis the odds ratio was calculated using Mantel–Haenszel statistics, using the random-effects model to interpret results. Results Study characteristics During the search 5794 records were identified. Automated removal of duplicates left 3909 records for title and abstract screening. Of these 3909 records, 722 met the criteria for full text assessment. One article was included after screening references of included articles. Full text evaluation resulted in 50 studies, which were included for quantitative analysis (Fig. 1). These 50 studies represent 3140 patients (Table 1). Risk of bias was assessed and is shown in Table 2, most of the included studies reported fair quality on the NOS.Figure 1 Flow diagram article selection. Table 1 Study characteristics. Study (name, year) Study design Anomaly IH/n Follow-up Time to hernia Redo Stoma Type of surgery Location of incision (n) Dariel, 2015 Retrospective Gastroschisis 6/41 3.1y (1–9) 165–1962d 5/6 No NA NA Chiu, 2006 Retrospective Gastroschisis 6/43 NR NR NR No NA NA Henrich, 2007*1 Prospective Gastroschisis 3/22 6.3y (1–10) NR 0/3 No NA NA Payne, 2010 Case–control Gastroschisis 2/127 3.3y (2.2) NR NR No NA NA Orion, 2011 Retrospective Gastroschisis 14/44 11.4 m “Prior to discharge” 4/14 No NA NA Weil, 2011 Retrospective Gastroschisis 43/190 NR NR NR No NA NA Friedmacher, 2014 Retrospective Gastroschisis 3/108 15y (4–37) NR 3/3 No NA NA Tullie, 2016 Retrospective Gastroschisis 10/39 53 m (10–101) NR NR No NA NA Dingemann, 2017 Multi-centre Gastroschisis 2/39 “At least 1y” 4 months 2/2 No NA NA Zmora, 2016 Retrospective Gastroschisis 1/11 16 m NR NR No NA NA Mutanen, 2018*1 Multi-centre Gastroschisis 3/34 Unclear NR 3/3 No NA NA Hawkins, 2019 Multi-centre Gastroschisis 49/566 NR NR NR No NA NA Demirogullari, 2011 Retrospective ARM 2/157 NR NR 0/2 Yes Laparoscopy NA de Vos, 2011 Retrospective ARM 2/39 5.5y NR NR Yes Both NA Yang, 2014 Retrospective ARM 0/20 1y NA NA Yes Laparotomy Sub-umbilical (20) Almosallam, 2016 Retrospective ARM 0/104 NR NA NA Yes Laparotomy NR Diao, 2016 Retrospective ARM 0/16 16 m (8–26) NA NA No Laparoscopy NA Ren, 2018 Retrospective ARM 0/25 18 m NA NA Yes Laparoscopy NA Ren, 2019 Retrospective ARM 0/48 59.4 m (13.7) NA NA Yes Laparoscopy NA Xiao, 2018 Retrospective ARM 0/17 2.6y (2–4) NA NA No Laparoscopy NA Escobar, 2004 Retrospective Duodenal obstruction 1/169 “Over 30ys” 10 months 1/1 No Laparotomy NR Takahashi, 2010 Prospective Duodenal obstruction 0/18 “Few months” NA NA No Laparotomy Sub-umbilical (8) Transverse (10) Kozlov, 2010 Retrospective Duodenal obstruction 0/27 Unclear NA NA No Laparoscopy NA Ghaffarpour, 2013 Retrospective Duodenal obstruction 0/28 “At least 1 m” NA NA No Laparotomy Supra-umbilical Jensen, 2013 Retrospective Duodenal obstruction 2/66 NR NR NR No Both Transverse (44) Madadi-Sanjani, 2015 Retrospective Biliary atresia 5/153 7.8 m (4.8–17.1) NR NR No Laparotomy Transverse (153) Bing, 2019 Prospective Biliary atresia 1/25 25.4 m (6–59) 2 days 1/1 No Laparoscopy NA Ramos-Gonzalez, 2019 Retrospective Biliary atresia 2/81 5.7y (1–11.6) NR 2/2 No Laparotomy Transverse (81) Escobar, 2005 Retrospective Hirschsprung 2/33 11y (9) NR 2/2 No Laparotomy NR Bianchi, 1998 Retrospective Hirschsprung 1/13 “Range 7 m–13y” NR NR No Laparotomy Oblique (13) Teitelbaum, 1998 Retrospective Hirschsprung 1/24 2.8y (1.7) NR 1/1 No Laparotomy Oblique (24) Santos, 1999 Retrospective Hirschsprung 1/65 NR NR NR NR Laparotomy NR Sauer, 2005 Retrospective Hirschsprung 1/24 7.3 m (9.7) NR 1/1 No Laparotomy Umbilical (24) Gao, 2019*1 Retrospective Hirschsprung 1/35 NR NR 1/1 NR Laparotomy NR Jona, 2001 Retrospective Hirschsprung 0/44 NR NA NA No Laparoscopy NA Ibrahim, 2012 Prospective Diaphragmatic hernia 0/15 20 m NA NR No Laparoscopy NA Tyson, 2017 Retrospective Diaphragmatic hernia 4/54 27 m (0.9–89) NR NR No Both NR de Bie, 2019 Multi-centre Diaphragmatic hernia 0/62 “At least 1y” NA NR No Laparotomy Sub-costal (62) Dewberry, 2019 Retrospective Diaphragmatic hernia 3/70 Unclear NR NR No NR NR Stollman, 2008 Retrospective Small intestinal atresia 4/110 Unclear NR NR No Laparotomy NR Festen, 2002 Multi-centre Small intestinal atresia 1/15 24 m (2–96) 9 months NR No Laparoscopy NA Banieghbal, 2007 Prospective Small intestinal atresia 0/16 6 m NA NA No Laparoscopy NA Li, 2012 Retrospective Small intestinal atresia 0/35 “Range 2–27 m” NA NA No Laparoscopy NA Mutanen, 2018*1 Multi-centre Small intestinal atresia 2/25 Unclear NR 2/2 NR Laparotomy NR Saxena, 2011 Prospective Omphalocele 1/50 “3 years” NR 1/1 No NA NA Lee, 2006 Retrospective Omphalocele 1/20 “Over 22ys” NR 1/1 No NA NA Henrich, 2007*1 Prospective Omphalocele 3/15 6.3y (1–10) NR NR No NA NA Jiang, 2016 Retrospective Omphalocele 4/24 NR NR NR No NA NA Zmora, 2016 Retrospective Omphalocele 1/6 16 m NR NR No NA NA Michel, 2018 Retrospective Omphalocele 0/16 11 m (1–48) NA NR No NA NA Diao, 2014 Retrospective Choledochal cyst 0/27 24 m (1–50) NA NA No Laparoscopy NA van den Eijnden, 2017 Retrospective Choledochal cyst 0/30 13.6y (0.8–26) NA NA No Both NR Önen, 2003 Combined Meckel’s diverticula 0/34 NR NA NA No Laparotomy NR Gao, 2019*1 Retrospective Meckel’s diverticula 0/12 NR NA NA No Laparotomy NR *1Henrich 2007, Mutanen 2018 and Gao 2019 each described 2 separate anomalies. NA not applicable, NR not reported. Table 2 Assessment of risk of bias. Author Year New Ottawa Scale (NOS) Selection (0–4  asterisks) Comparability (0–2 asterisks) Outcome (0–3 asterisks) Total (0–9) Stollman 2008 *** * *** 7 Ibrahim 2012 *** – ** 5 Festen 2002 ** ** ** 6 Escobar 2005 *** – *** 6 Dariel 2015 *** * *** 7 Demirogullari 2011 ** – ** 4 Bianchi 1998 *** – *** 6 Teitelbaum 1998 ** – *** 5 Santos 1999 *** – *** 6 Saxena 2001 *** * *** 7 Önen 2003 *** – ** 5 Escobar 2004 *** * ** 6 Sauer 2005 ** ** ** 6 Chiu 2006 *** * ** 6 Lee 2006 ** * *** 6 Banieghbal 2007 ** – *** 5 Henrich 2007 *** – * 4 Payne 2010 **** * *** 8 Takahashi 2010 *** * ** 6 de Vos 2011 *** – *** 6 Kozlov 2010 *** ** ** 7 Orion 2011 *** – ** 5 Li 2012 *** – ** 5 Weil 2011 *** * *** 7 Ghaffarpour 2013 *** * ** 6 Jensen 2013 *** ** ** 7 Diao 2014 ** * *** 6 Friedmacher 2014 *** ** *** 8 Yang 2014 ** – ** 4 Madadi-Sanjani 2015 *** ** ** 7 Almosallam 2016 *** – ** 5 Diao 2016 ** – ** 4 Jiang 2016 ** – ** 4 Tullie 2016 *** * *** 7 Dingemann 2017 *** – *** 7 Tyson 2017 *** * ** 6 van den Eijnden 2017 *** * *** 7 Zmora 2016 *** – ** 5 Michel 2018 *** * ** 6 Bing 2019 *** – *** 6 de Bie 2019 ** * *** 6 Dewberry 2019 ** ** ** 6 Gao 2019 ** – ** 4 Jona 2001 ** – ** 4 Mutanen 2018 *** ** *** 8 Ramos-Gonzalez 2019 *** * *** 7 Ren 2018 ** * *** 6 Ren 2019 ** * *** 6 Xiao 2018 ** * *** 6 Hawkins 2019 *** ** ** 7 Six were prospective cohort studies, one combined a prospective-with a retrospective cohort, four were multicentre retrospective cohort studies, thirty-eight were retrospective cohort studies and one was a matched case–control study. None of the studies had a randomized design. Nineteen of the studies were conducted in North America, sixteen in Europe, eleven in Asia, three in Africa and one in the Middle-East. Follow up was at least half a year in 24 (48%) of all studies. Overall proportions In 3140 patients 188 incisional hernias occurred15–64. None of the studies reported on the mode of diagnosis or the size of the defect. The pooled proportion of IH (Fig. 2) with all anomalies combined was 0.03 (95% CI 0.02–0.05; I2 = 79%, p ≤ 0.01). Separate pooled proportions were calculated for the following birth defects: Gastroschisis 0.10 (95% CI 0.06–0.17; n = 142/1273; I2 = 86%; p ≤ 0.01); Anorectal malformations 0.01 (95% CI 0.00–0.05; n = 4/426; I2 = 29%; p = 0.96); Duodenal obstruction 0.01 (95% CI 0.00–0.03; n = 3/308; I2 = 0%; p = 0.77); Biliary atresia 0.03 (95% CI 0.02–0.06; n = 8/259; I2 = 0%; p = 0.91); Hirschsprung’s disease 0.03 (95% CI 0.01–0.06; n = 7/238; I2 = 0%; p = 0.93); Congenital diaphragmatic hernia 0.03 (95% CI 0.01–0.10; n = 7/201; I2 = 34%; p = 0.91); Small intestinal atresia 0.03 (95% CI 0.02–0.07; n = 7/201; I2 = 0%; p = 0.91); Omphalocele 0.07 (95% CI 0.03–0.17; n = 10/131; I2 = 42%; p = 0.32). Choledochal cyst (N = 57) and Meckel (N = 46) are included in the overall proportion but were not reported separately as they did not meet the described criteria.Figure 2 Pooled proportion of IH. Type of surgery We calculated pooled proportions separately for all cases operated by laparoscopy and all cases operated by laparotomy as described in Table 1. For infants treated with by laparoscopy the pooled proportion was 0.01 (95% CI 0.01–0.03; n = 7/536; I2 = 0%; p = 0.00)18,22,25,26,37,39,40,42,50,51,59,62. For infants treated by laparotomy the pooled proportion was 0.02 (95% CI 0.01–0.04; n = 26/1098; I2 = 39%; p = 0.76)15,17,21,22,28,29,32,33,37,43,45,46,49,52,53,55–57,59,63. Of the studies that did report on the location of the incision, transverse incision was most reported. Therefore, no subgroup analysis was done based on the location of incision. History of stoma All studies that reported on the history of stoma were articles describing anorectal malformations (ARM). Together, these studies contained four hernias. Two of which were not at the stoma site, but were reported as port-site hernia following laparoscopic assisted anorectoplasty22. The other two were seen at the site of stoma23. There were two articles describing ARM treatment without a stoma, no hernias occurred in these cohorts26,62. Gastroschisis Subgroup analysis within the GS studies showed a reduced risk of IH for simple gastroschisis compared to complex (Fig. 3); Odds ratio 0.18 (95% CI 0.03–0.94; p = 0.04; I2 = 0%).Figure 3 Forest plot simple vs complex GS. Also, an increased risk of IH was present when SILO closure was performed compared to primary closure (Fig. 4) with an odds ratio of 3.09 (95% CI 1.63–5.87; p ≤ 0.01; I2 = 27%).Figure 4 Forest plot SILO vs primary closure. Discussion This systematic review pooled the reported proportions on incisional hernia following abdominal surgery for congenital anomalies in infants. These proportions approximate the incidences of these complications. Therefore, our reported approximation of the incidence of IH was 3%. Within the different congenital anomalies gastroschisis patients are most at risk with an approximated incidence of 10%. In subgroup analysis complex gastroschisis (patients with GS and additional anomalies) and SILO closure were identified as risk factors for IH. Studies reporting on laparoscopy and laparotomy seem to have similar incidences of IH although, due to the design of included studies, we were not able to compare studies. Still, this seems to be in line with previous cohort studies that focused on incisional hernia specifically in pediatric patients. These studies opted that the occurrence of IH seems to be more related to specific diagnosis instead of mode of surgery6,7. Within the included studies type of incision was only scarcely reported. Out of those that did, none reported the use of a midline incision. Transverse incision was the most reported type of incision. The use of this incision in infants provides a surgeon the best exposure to the abdominal cavity in neonates. The abdominal cavity of infants resembles a horizontal ellipsoid. With age and growth this ellipsoid changes into vertical position65. Thus, the younger the child the better visualization is obtained by using a transverse incision. Transverse incisions have been shown to have a lower incidence of IH compared to midline incision in adults66,67. Previous studies suggested that the acquired newborn abdominal diseases necrotizing enterocolitis and pyloromyotomy are at higher risk for the development of IH7,68. Our review shows that the congenital abdominal wall defects gastroschisis and omphalocele should be added to this list. Gastroschisis and omphalocele showed highest incidences of IH compared to the other congenital abdominal anomalies. Both anomalies are characterized by an abdominal wall defect with protruding viscera. In omphalocele, the viscera are covered with a membrane whilst in gastroschisis cases the viscera are not covered and thus more susceptible to infection. In order to surgically repair the defect, the viscera have to be reduced intra-abdominally. The primary goal of surgical repair is to close the defect as soon as possible, as to decrease the risk of infection, whilst simultaneously minimizing the risk of ischemic injury to the viscera due to increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP)69–72. An increase of pressure between 0–15 mmHg is accepted because of the low risk of abdominal compartment syndrome70. However, even this increased outwards abdominal pressure during the wound healing process increases fascial tension, which could cause the increased incidence of IH34. Since 2004 an alternative method for a select group of patients named sutureless closure was proposed by methods of primary reduction and covering of the gastroschisis defect by watertight dressing and the umbilical cord73. This technique supposedly minimizes IAP and allows for spontaneous closure74. It is reported that this technique increases the risk of umbilical hernias compared to sutured closure. Still these hernias seem to resolve, not requiring redo surgery and sutureless closure seems to overall entail less complications58,75,76. This also might be the case for sutured closure. Out of six included studies that reported on redo surgery only 17 of the 31 hernias needed reoperation. It must be noted that most studies did not report on redo surgery. Most gastroschisis cases are isolated conditions, but in 10% associated anomalies like intestinal atresias or necrotizing enterocolitis occur resulting in complex gastroschisis72. Our results show that simple gastroschisis has an odds-ratio of 0.18 to develop an IH compared to complex gastroschisis. In general, complex cases are associated with both longer parental nutrition and length of hospital stay77. This combination of impaired nutritional status and multiple anomalies could accumulate to a multifactorial cause of increased IH incidence. We have shown that SILO closure increases the risk of IH compared to primary closure. SILO placement is mostly considered when the viscera cannot be reduced into the abdominal cavity because of bowel oedema. This oedema might result in higher IAP leading to an increase in the chances of IH. In a study comparing primary closure with SILO closure it was shown that the incidence of IH increased with longer duration of SILO reduction34. Since the incidence in incisional hernia in the pediatric population is low, most cohort studies only describe limited numbers of patients with an incisional hernia. Still, in most of these studies thorough statistical analysis is done, often by chi-square or regression analysis. However, both analyses demand a sufficient amount of hernia cases ensuring the least expected count to be five for chi-squared statistics and a minimum of ten hernias per one controlling variable (events per variable (EPV)) for any form of regression analysis78,79. Not abiding these statistical rules can lead to inaccurate results causing conclusions to be, to some extent, unsupported or deceptive. Future research should ensure statistical power with a sufficiently large cohort. The incidence provided by this review can aid in power size calculations. This review was limited because none of the included studies used a specific classification for incisional hernias or described the way they were diagnosed. Moreover, many studies did not report on duration of follow-up or had a follow up of less than a year, possibly resulting in missed incisional hernias. Also, different surgical approaches and disease severities were included. These differences dissolve when combining the study results into proportional meta-analysis, which could have influenced our results. The broad inclusion criteria, resulting in differences between compared studies, can partly explain the broad confidence intervals of gastroschisis and omphalocele. In adults, consensus has been reached that an incisional hernia should be classified by its location, length and width80. Whilst infantile incisional hernias might differ from adults, it seems advisable for prospective studies to include these characteristics as well as to describe the diagnostic modality as to aid in the generalizability of the interpretations. Using any form of diagnostic imaging will increase the total amount of detected IHs. Yet, this increase will be accompanied with disagreement between observers, as is the case in adults, making the IHs less generalizable which is why we suggest physical examination could be sufficient81. In our opinion, the clinical significance of IHs in infants undetectable by physical examination is doubtful. Smaller hernias have been reported to close without necessitating surgery, as is also the case in congenital umbilical hernias7. Since most IHs develop within a year after surgery it is desirable to plan an extra repeat visit at least a year after surgery as part of the research protocol6. Another limitation of our study is that most included studies did not describe the incisional hernia cases in detail. Often, just the total number was noted without describing further case characteristics. This withheld us from thoroughly analyzing indications for redo-surgery or known risk factors such as having a history of stoma or surgical site infection. However, for gastroschisis specifically, though these finding are based on non-randomized retrospective cohort studies, our results suggest that SILO closure and complex cases are more at risk of IH. The high overall heterogeneity seems to be fairly explained by the spread in IH proportions within gastroschisis studies. This spread in its turn could be explained by differences in distribution of the described risk factors. Other anomalies showed moderate to low heterogeneity. Conclusion This systematic review shows that the incidence of incisional hernia is 3% all studies on surgical correction of abdominal congenital anomalies in infants are combined. Overall the incidences seem comparable between studies reporting on laparoscopies and laparotomies. Gastroschisis patients are most at risk for developing IH with an approximated incidence of 10%. In subgroup analysis complex gastroschisis and SILO closure were identified as significant risk factors for IH. Supplementary information Supplementary information. Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Supplementary information is available for this paper at 10.1038/s41598-020-77976-1. Author contributions L.E.S. and R.V. developed the search strategy. All authors contributed to the development of the selection criteria. L.E.S. and D.N. were first and second reviewer. J.D., G.M., E.vH. and W.dJ. provided clinical expertise. L.E.S., J.D. and G.M. provided statistical and research conducting expertise. LES drafted the manuscript. All authors read, provided feedback and approved the final manuscript. Data availability Data available on request. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. ==== Refs References 1. Dietz UA Menzel S Lock J Wiegering A The Treatment of Incisional Hernia Deutsch. Arzteblatt Int. 2018 115 31 37 10.3238/arztebl.2018.0031 2. Nacef K Trocar site post incisional hernia: about 19 cases The Pan African medical journal 2018 29 183 10.11604/pamj.2018.29.183.14467 30061961 3. McCann ME Neurodevelopmental outcome at 5 years of age after general anaesthesia or awake-regional anaesthesia in infancy (GAS): an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled equivalence trial Lancet (Lond., Engl.) 2019 393 664 677 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32485-1 4. Sun L Early childhood general anaesthesia exposure and neurocognitive development Br J Anaesth 2010 105 Suppl 1 i61 i68 10.1093/bja/aeq302 21148656 5. Itatsu K Incidence of and risk factors for incisional hernia after abdominal surgery Br. J. Surg. 2014 101 1439 1447 10.1002/bjs.9600 25123379 6. Mullassery D Pedersen A Robb A Smith N Incisional hernia in pediatric surgery—experience at a single UK tertiary centre J. Pediatr. Surg. 2016 51 1791 1794 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.06.013 27421823 7. Tanaka K Risk factors for incisional hernia in children World J. Surg. 2018 42 2265 2268 10.1007/s00268-017-4434-4 29288306 8. Cost NG Hernia after pediatric urological laparoscopy J. Urol. 2010 183 1163 1167 10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.053 20096869 9. Paya K Wurm J Fakhari M Felder-Puig R Puig S Trocar-site hernia as a typical postoperative complication of minimally invasive surgery among preschool children Surg. Endosc. 2008 22 2724 2727 10.1007/s00464-008-9768-4 18270766 10. Taguchi T Nagata K Kinoshita Y Esumi G Progress in and outcomes of neonatal surgery over the past 50 years Nihon Geka Gakkai zasshi 2014 115 306 311 25702509 11. Tzong KY Han S Roh A Ing C Epidemiology of pediatric surgical admissions in US children: data from the HCUP kids inpatient database J. Neurosurg. Anesthesiol. 2012 24 391 395 10.1097/ANA.0b013e31826a0345 23076227 12. Shamseer LP Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation BMJ (Clin. Res. Ed.) 2015 350 g7647 2015 10.1136/bmj.g7647 13. Wells GA Checklists of methodological issues for review authors to consider when including non-randomized studies in systematic reviews Res. Synth. Methods 2013 4 63 77 10.1002/jrsm.1077 26053540 14. Higgins JPT Thompson SG Deeks JJ Altman DG Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses . BMJ (Clin. Res. Ed.) 2003 327 557 560 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 15. Almosallam OI Aseeri A Shanafey SA Outcome of loop versus divided colostomy in the management of anorectal malformations Ann. Saudi Med. 2016 36 352 355 10.5144/0256-4947.2016.352 27710988 16. Banieghbal B Beale PG Minimal access approach to jejunal atresia J. Pediatr. Surg. 2007 42 1362 1364 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.03.034 17706497 17. Bianchi A One-stage neonatal reconstruction without stoma for Hirschsprung's disease Semin. Pediatr. Surg. 1998 7 170 173 10.1016/S1055-8586(98)70013-7 9718655 18. Bing L Modifications to expose porta hepatis for laparoscopic portoenterostomy easier in Biliary Atresia J. Surg. Res. 2019 233 368 375 10.1016/j.jss.2018.08.013 30502273 19. Chiu B Closing arguments for gastroschisis: Management with silo reduction J. Perinat. Med. 2006 34 243 245 16602846 20. Dariel A Poocharoen W De Silva N Pleasants H Gerstle JT Secondary plastic closure of gastroschisis is associated with a lower incidence of mechanical ventilation Eur. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2015 25 34 40 25526605 21. De Bie F Early surgical complications after congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair by thoracotomy vs. laparotomy: a bicentric comparison J. Pediatr. Surg. 2020 55 J. Pediatr. Surg. 2110 22. De Vos C Arnold M Sidler D Moore SW A comparison of laparoscopic-assisted (LAARP) and posterior sagittal (PSARP) anorectoplasty in the outcome of intermediate and high anorectal malformations S. Afr. J. Surg. 2011 49 39 43 21933483 23. Demirogullari B Ostomy complicatIons in patients with anorectal malformations Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2011 27 1075 1078 10.1007/s00383-011-2955-8 21789666 24. Dewberry L Hilton S Gien J Liechty KW Marwan AI Flap repair in congenital diaphragmatic hernia leads to lower rates of recurrence J. Pediatr. Surg. 2019 54 2487 2491 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.08.042 31515112 25. Diao M Li L Li Q Ye M Cheng W Challenges and strategies for single-incision laparoscopic Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy in managing giant choledochal cysts Int. J. Surg. (Lond. Engl.) 2014 12 412 417 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.03.007 26. Diao M Congenital anomaly rectified at birth: one-stage single-incision laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty for newborns with anorectal malformations and recto-urethral fistula Surg. Endosc. 2016 30 5156 5164 10.1007/s00464-016-4841-x 26969663 27. Dingemann C Surgical management of congenital abdominal wall defects in Germany: a population-based study and comparison with literature reports Eur. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2017 27 516 525 10.1055/s-0037-1598250 28235205 28. Escobar MA Long-term outcomes in total colonic aganglionosis: a 32-year experience J. Pediatr. Surg. 2005 40 955 961 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2005.03.043 15991177 29. Escobar MA Duodenal atresia and stenosis: Long-term follow-up over 30 years J. Pediatr. Surg. 2004 39 867 871 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2004.02.025 15185215 30. Festen S Excellent long-term outcome for survivors of apple peel atresia J. Pediatr. Surg. 2002 37 61 65 10.1053/jpsu.2002.29428 11781988 31. Friedmacher F Hock A Castellani C Avian A Höllwarth ME Gastroschisis-related complications requiring further surgical interventions Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2014 30 615 620 10.1007/s00383-014-3500-3 24736970 32. Gao R Enhanced recovery after surgery in pediatric gastrointestinal surgery J. Int. Med. Res. 2019 47 4815 4826 10.1177/0300060519865350 31379230 33. Ghaffarpour N Svensson PJ Svenningsson A Wester T Mesas Burgos C Supraumbilical incision with U-u umbilicoplasty for congenital duodenal atresia: the Stockholm experience J. Pediatr. Surg. 2013 48 1981 1985 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.06.028 24074679 34. Hawkins RB Immediate versus silo closure for gastroschisis: results of a large multicenter study J. Pediatr. Surg. 2019 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.08.002 31472924 35. Henrich K Huemmer HP Reingruber B Weber PG Gastroschisis and omphalocele: treatments and long-term outcomes Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2008 24 167 173 10.1007/s00383-007-2055-y 17985136 36. Ibrahim MM Two Trocar laparoscopic repair of morgagni hernia in infant and childhood: simplified technique World J. Laparosc. Surg. 2013 6 47 51 10.5005/jp-journals-10033-1181 37. Jensen AR Laparoscopic versus open treatment of congenital duodenal obstruction: multicenter short-term outcomes analysis J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. 2013 23 876 880 10.1089/lap.2013.0140 38. Jiang W Use of small intestinal submucosal and acellular dermal matrix grafts in giant omphaloceles in neonates and a rabbit abdominal wall defect model J. Pediatr. Surg. 2016 51 368 373 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.08.005 26364879 39. Jona JZ Personal experience with 50 laparoscopic procedures for Hirschsprung's disease in infants and children Pediatr. Endosurg. Innov. Tech. 2001 5 361 363 10.1089/10926410152776333 40. Kozlov Y Keyhole approach for repair of congenital duodenal obstruction Eur. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2011 21 124 127 10.1055/s-0030-1268455 21157693 41. Lee SL Initial nonoperative management and delayed closure for treatment of giant omphaloceles J. Pediatr. Surg. 2006 41 1846 1849 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2006.06.011 17101356 42. Li B Chen WB Wang SQ Liu SL Li L Laparoscopy-assisted surgery for neonatal intestinal atresia and stenosis: a report of 35 cases Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2012 28 1225 1228 10.1007/s00383-012-3216-1 23143134 43. Madadi-Sanjani O Carl N Longerich T Petersen C Andruszkow JHK Inguinal hernias represent the most frequent surgical complication after kasai in biliary atresia infants BioMed Res. Int. 2015 2015 383791 10.1155/2015/383791 26240820 44. Michel JL ZORRO: Z omphaloplasty repair for omphalocele J. Pediatr. Surg. 2018 53 1424 1427 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2018.04.003 29735202 45. Mutanen A Koivusalo A Pakarinen M Complicated gastroschisis is associated with greater intestinal morbidity than gastroschisis or intestinal atresia alone Eur. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2018 28 495 501 10.1055/s-0038-1636943 28977809 46. Onen A Cigdem MK Ozturk H Otcu S Dokucu AI When to resect and when not to resect an asymptomatic Meckel's diverticulum: an ongoing challenge Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2003 19 57 61 10.1007/s00383-002-0850-z 12721725 47. Orion KC Outcomes of plastic closure in gastroschisis Surgery 2011 150 177 185 10.1016/j.surg.2011.05.001 21719056 48. Payne NR A cross-sectional, case-control follow-up of infants with gastroschisis J. Neonat.-Perinat. Med. 2010 3 207 215 10.3233/NPM-2010-0117 49. Ramos-Gonzalez G Predictors of need for liver transplantation in children undergoing hepatoportoenterostomy for biliary atresia J. Pediatr. Surg. 2019 54 1127 1131 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.02.051 30879751 50. Ren X Single-incision laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty versus three-port laparoscopy in treatment of persistent cloaca: a midterm follow-up J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. Part A 2018 28 1540 1547 10.1089/lap.2018.0225 51. Ren X Single-incision laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty for treating children with intermediate-type anorectal malformations and rectobulbar fistula: a comparative study Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2019 35 1255 1263 10.1007/s00383-019-04549-3 31494699 52. Santos MC Giacomantonio JM Lau HY Primary Swenson pull-through compared with multiple-stage pull-through in the neonate J. Pediatr. Surg. 1999 34 1079 1081 10.1016/S0022-3468(99)90570-5 10442594 53. Sauer CJ Langer JC Wales PW The versatility of the umbilical incision in the management of Hirschsprung's disease J. Pediatr. Surg. 2005 40 385 389 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2004.10.025 15750934 54. Saxena A Willital GH Omphalocele: clinical review and surgical experience using dura patch grafts Hernia J. Hernias Abdom. Wall Surg. 2002 6 73 78 10.1007/s10029-002-0058-0 55. Stollman TH Decreased mortality but increased morbidity in neonates with jejunoileal atresia; a study of 114 cases over a 34-year period J. Pediatr. Surg. 2009 44 217 221 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2008.10.043 19159746 56. Takahashi Y Umbilical crease incision for duodenal atresia achieves excellent cosmetic results Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2010 26 963 966 10.1007/s00383-010-2645-y 20623293 57. Teitelbaum DH Coran AG Primary pull-through in the newborn Semin. Pediatr. Surg. 1998 7 103 107 10.1016/S1055-8586(98)70021-6 9597701 58. Tullie LGC Umbilical hernia following gastroschisis closure: A common event? Pediatr. Surg. Int. 2016 32 811 814 10.1007/s00383-016-3906-1 27344584 59. Tyson AF Sola R Jr Arnold MR Cosper GH Schulman AM Thoracoscopic versus open congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair: single tertiary center review J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. Part A 2017 27 1209 1216 10.1089/lap.2017.0298 60. van den Eijnden MHA Choledochal malformation in children: lessons learned from a dutch national study World J. Surg. 2017 41 2631 2637 10.1007/s00268-017-4064-x 28589237 61. Weil BR Leys CM Rescorla FJ The jury is still out: changes in gastroschisis management over the last decade are associated with both benefits and shortcomings J. Pediatr. Surg. 2012 47 119 124 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2011.10.029 22244403 62. Xiao H One-stage laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty for neonates with anorectal malformation and recto-prostatic or recto-bulbar fistula according to the krickenbeck classification J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. Part A 2018 28 1029 1034 10.1089/lap.2017.0690 63. Yang L Two-stage laparoscopic approaches for high anorectal malformation: transumbilical colostomy and anorectoplasty J. Pediatr. Surg. 2014 49 1631 1634 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.05.014 25475808 64. Zmora O Castle SL Papillon S Stein JE The biological prosthesis is a viable option for abdominal wall reconstruction in pediatric high risk defects Am. J. Surg. 2017 214 479 482 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.01.004 28093117 65. Gauderer MW A rationale for routine use of transverse abdominal incisions in infants and children J. Pediatr. Surg. 1981 16 583 586 10.1016/0022-3468(81)90009-9 7277160 66. Lee L Incisional hernia after midline versus transverse specimen extraction incision: a randomized trial in patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy Ann. Surg. 2018 268 41 47 10.1097/sla.0000000000002615 29166359 67. Halm JA Lip H Schmitz PI Jeekel J Incisional hernia after upper abdominal surgery: a randomised controlled trial of midline versus transverse incision Hernia J. Hernias Abdom. Wall Surg. 2009 13 275 280 10.1007/s10029-008-0469-7 68. Mullassery D Pedersen A Robb A Smith N Incisional hernia in pediatric surgery–experience at a single UK tertiary centre J. Pediatr. Surg. 2016 51 1791 1794 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.06.013 27421823 69. Christison-Lagay ER Kelleher CM Langer JC Neonatal abdominal wall defects Semin. Fetal Neonat. Med. 2011 16 164 172 10.1016/j.siny.2011.02.003 70. Gamba P Midrio P Abdominal wall defects: prenatal diagnosis, newborn management, and long-term outcomes Semin. Pediatr. Surg. 2014 23 283 290 10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2014.09.009 25459013 71. Islam S Advances in surgery for abdominal wall defects: gastroschisis and omphalocele Clin. Perinatol. 2012 39 375 386 10.1016/j.clp.2012.04.008 22682386 72. Ledbetter DJ Congenital abdominal wall defects and reconstruction in pediatric surgery: gastroschisis and omphalocele Surg. Clin. N. Am. 2012 92 713 727 10.1016/j.suc.2012.03.010 22595717 73. Sandler A Lawrence J Meehan J Phearman L Soper R A "plastic" sutureless abdominal wall closure in gastroschisis J. Pediatr. Surg. 2004 39 738 741 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2004.01.040 15137009 74. Petrosyan M Sandler AD Closure methods in gastroschisis Semin. Pediatr. Surg. 2018 27 304 308 10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2018.08.009 30413261 75. Youssef F Gorgy A Arbash G Puligandla PS Baird RJ Flap versus fascial closure for gastroschisis: a systematic review and meta-analysis J. Pediatr. Surg. 2016 51 718 725 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.02.010 26970850 76. Miyake H Seo S O'Connell JS Janssen Lok M Pierro A Safety and usefulness of plastic closure in infants with gastroschisis: a systematic review and meta-analysis Pediatr. Surg. int. 2019 35 107 116 10.1007/s00383-018-4381-7 30392129 77. Melov SJ Complexity of gastroschisis predicts outcome: epidemiology and experience in an Australian tertiary centre BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2018 18 222 222 10.1186/s12884-018-1867-1 29890949 78. Austin PC Steyerberg EW The number of subjects per variable required in linear regression analyses J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2015 68 627 636 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.014 25704724 79. McHugh ML The chi-square test of independence Biochem. Med. (Zagreb.) 2013 23 143 149 10.11613/bm.2013.018 23894860 80. Muysoms FE Classification of primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias Hernia 2009 13 407 414 10.1007/s10029-009-0518-x 19495920 81. Kroese LF Sneiders D Kleinrensink GJ Muysoms F Lange JF Comparing different modalities for the diagnosis of incisional hernia: a systematic review Hernia 2018 22 229 242 10.1007/s10029-017-1725-5 29327247