Rectus diastasis in males: a narrative review
- PMID: 40569471
- DOI: 10.1007/s10029-025-03404-w
Rectus diastasis in males: a narrative review
Abstract
Purpose: Rectus diastasis in male patients is underexposed in the literature. This review aims to list the available evidence and summarize recommendations for clinicians.
Methods: A multidatabase literature search was performed with a focus on rectus diastasis (RD) in male patients. Studies were screened independently, after unblinding discrepancies discussed amongst the group. Quality of included studies was assessed and data was extracted using predefined criteria.
Results: Twenty-one studies were included for qualitative syntheses. Prevalence of RD in males have been reported 25-30% and higher with concomitant findings such as other abdominal wall hernia (47%) and aortic aneurysm (67%). This outreached the portion of treated rectus diastasis, assumed to be between 4 and 14%. Quality of linea alba was described adversely affected by visceral obesity, less fibers, and smoking. Core stability was found to be related with RD in terms of low back pain in males, while body image was not encountered as a reported outcome. Limited number of studies shared algorithms for treatment of choice, showing a preference for mesh-based approach for male RD. This has also been suggested for hernia repair alongside RD to reduce the recurrence rate.
Conclusion: Based on limited number of reports, the prevalence of RD in males is at least double the portion undergoing a repair. The community is asked to pay more attention for rectus diastasis in male patients; if present, inquire about the complaints and in case of a ventral hernia, check the inter recti distance.
Keywords: Linea alba; Male; Rectus diastasis; Ventral hernia.
© 2025. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Ethical approval: Medical Ethical Board approval and patient informed consent are both not applicable in case of a systematic review. Conflict of interest: All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
-
- Hernández-Granados P, Henriksen NA, Berrevoet F, Cuccurullo D, López-Cano M, Nienhuijs S, Ross D, Montgomery A (2021) European hernia society guidelines on management of rectus diastasis. Br J Surg 108(10):1189–1191. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab128 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Muscogiuri G, Verde L, Vetrani C, Barrea L, Savastano S, Colao A (2023) Obesity: a gender-view. J Endocrinol Invest 47(2):299–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-023-02196-z - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A (2016) Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 5(1):210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M et al (eds) (2016) Apr 25). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
-
- Downes MJ, Brennan ML, Williams HC, Dean RS (2016) Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS). BMJ Open 6(12):e011458. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011458 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
