Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Incisional Hernia Development: Wound Healing Gone Wrong?

Abbas AA., Gunning P., Chintapatla S., Kröger R.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, Scar, published in Wound Repair Regen (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Wound Repair Regen (2026)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
41787644
PMCID
PMC12963529
DOI
10.1111/wrr.70131

Abstract (original English)

Incisional hernia (IH) is a common complication of abdominal surgeries, characterised by the protrusion of abdominal contents through a weakened surgical scar. Despite advancements in surgical techniques and biomaterials, IH remains a significant clinical and economic burden, with recurrence rates reaching up to 32% after repair. This unusually high number, despite many years of research focused on the improvement of surgical techniques, requires a better understanding of the potential origins of IH occurrence. This must implicate the tissues involved in scar formation of the abdominal wall for a better understanding of how these tissues are affected by the incision and what can potentially affect the most optimal wound healing. This work aimed to provide a comprehensive summary of the current knowledge regarding the ultrastructure of the abdominal wall and how incisions affect its mechanical integrity.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Abdominal WallCicatrixAnimalsHumansWound HealingIncisional Hernia

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research