ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2018
Surgical training in robotic surgery: surgical experience of robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal herniorrhaphy with and without resident participation.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic inguinal hernia repair: is technology taking over? Systematic review and meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Feasibility and safety of supervised robotic training for minor general surgical procedures: a prospective single-center study with early learning curve analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair: Management of Inguinal Hernias in the 21st Century.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Robotic minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair with the Dexter robotic system™: A prospective multicenter clinical investigation.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- RoCS: Robotic Curriculum for young Surgeons.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Review
- Robot-assisted groin hernia repair is primarily performed by specialized surgeons: a scoping review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Implementation of robot-assisted groin hernia repair diminishes the prospects of young surgeons' training: a nationwide register-based cohort study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Article
- Current status and future perspectives of robotic inguinal hernia repair.Surgery today · 2022Review
- INGUINAL REPAIR VIA ROBOTIC ASSISTED TECHNIQUE: LITERATURE REVIEW.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2018Review
- Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair Outcomes: Operative Time and Cost Analysis.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
- Making the Jump: A Qualitative Analysis on the Transition From Bedside Assistant to Console Surgeon in Robotic Surgery Training.Journal of surgical educationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted surgery is becoming more popular in general surgery. Implementation of a robotic curriculum is necessary and will influence surgical training. The aim of this study is to compare surgical experience and outcomes with and without resident participation in robotic inguinal herniorrhaphy. A retrospective review of patients who underwent either unilateral or bilateral robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal herniorrhaphy, with and without resident participation as console surgeons from January through December 2015, was performed. Patient demographics, procedure-related data, postoperative variables, and follow-up data were analyzed. A total of 104 patients were included. Patients were significantly older in the Resident group (57.5 ± 14.1 vs 50.6 ± 13.5 years, p = 0.01). Gender, BMI, and ASA classification were similar between groups. There were similar mean operative times for unilateral (89.9 ± 19.5 vs 84.8 ± 22.2 min, p = 0.42) and bilateral (128.4 ± 21.9 vs 129.8 ± 50.9 min, p = 0.90) inguinal herniorrhaphy as well as mean robot console times for unilateral (73.2 ± 18.4 vs 67.3 ± 29.9 min, p = 0.44) and bilateral (115.5 ± 24.6 vs 109.3 ± 55.4 min, p = 0.67) inguinal herniorrhaphy with and without resident participation, respectively. Postoperative complications included urinary retention (11.1 vs 2.0%, p = 0.11), conversion to open repair (0 vs 2%, p = 0.48), and delayed reoperation (0 vs 4%, p = 0.22) with and without resident participation, respectively. Patients' symptoms/signs at follow-up were similar among groups. Robotic-assisted TAPP inguinal herniorrhaphy with resident participation as console surgeons did not affect the hospital operative experience or patient outcomes. This procedure can be implemented as part of the resident robotic curriculum with rates of morbidity equivalent to those of published studies.Level of evidence 2b.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29307096What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.