ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2020
The first year is the hardest: a comparison of early versus late experience after the introduction of robotic hiatal hernia repair.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Implementation of Robotics in the Setting of Hiatal Hernia Repair: A Scoping Review on Current Evidence.Cureus · 2025Review
- Voluminous hiatal hernias - the role of robotic surgery.Innovative surgical sciences · 2025Review
- The impact of robotic surgery on the treatment of benign esophageal and gastric disease: early experience of a specialized unit.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluation of forces applied to tissues during robotic-assisted surgical tasks using a novel force feedback technology.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2023Article
- Economic evaluation of robotic and laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While the majority of the literature written concerning minimally invasive hiatal hernia repair involves laparoscopy, little has been written concerning the transition to a robotic technique. We present our experience, with a transparent analysis of data, with regard to the introduction of robotic paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repair by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. We reviewed our first 30 consecutive patients who underwent robotic PEH over a 2-year period after the introduction of robotic surgery at our institution. Patients were divided into two groups: the early experience group (procedures performed within the first year of introduction of robotic technique, n = 13) and a late experience group (procedures performed in the second year, n = 17). All procedures were performed by a single experienced foregut surgeon. The mean operative time for the early group was significantly greater than for the late group, 184 min versus 142 min, respectively (p < 0.01). Four patients in the early group required conversion to open, while zero patients in the late group required conversion (p = 0.03). Patient demographics and complications did not differ significantly between the two patient populations. The early robotic hiatal hernia repair experience can be more difficult than expected, even in the hands of an experienced laparoscopic team. We identify several areas of improvement including patient positioning, operating room team training, and technical experience. This data can help other surgeons prepare for the transition to robotic foregut surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31025244What 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.