Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31093778›Full record

SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2019

Robotic inguinal hernia repair: is technology taking over? Systematic review and meta-analysis.

A Aiolfi, M Cavalli, G Micheletto, P G Bruni, F Lombardo, C Perali, G Bonitta, D Bona

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

A AiolfiDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy. alberto.aiolfi86@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7764-6075
M CavalliDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
G MichelettoDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
P G BruniDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
F LombardoDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
C PeraliDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
G BonittaDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
D BonaDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine the current evidence on the therapeutic role and outcomes of robotic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal hernia repair (rTAPP) to better define its risk-benefit ratio and guide clinical decision-making.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were consulted. A Frequentist single-arm study-level random effect meta-analysis was performed.

resultsTwelve studies published between 2015 and 2018 met the inclusion criteria (1645 patients). Patients' age ranged from 16 to 96, the BMI ranged from 19 to 35.6 kg/m

conclusionsRobotic technology has been progressively entering surgical thinking and gradually changing surgical procedures. Based on the results of the present study, the rTAPP seems feasible, safe, and effective in the short term for patients with unilateral and bilateral inguinal hernias. Further prospective studies and randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresAttitude of Health PersonnelClinical Decision-MakingHernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyHumansLaparoscopyProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentSurgical Meshda VinciInguinal herniaOutcomesRobotics

Identifiers

PMID31093778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.