ArticleInternational journal of surgery protocols2020
Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial).
Article in International journal of surgery protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04171921 (Robotic Versus Open Primary Ventral Hernia Repair), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Robotic Versus Open Primary Ventral Hernia Repair: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of robot-assisted versus endo-laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Research hotspots and trends of robotic hernia repair: a bibliometric analysis (2005-2025).Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic primary ventral hernia repair-a multi-national Delphi expert consensus.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Hospital costs of robotic-assisted and open treatment of large ventral hernias.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Description of the Current Da VinciJournal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of the present study is to compare the outcomes open PVHR and robotic PVHR. METHODS/
designThe present study will be a randomized single-blinded controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis comparing robotic PVHR to open PVHR in adult patients undergoing elective PVHR with a defect ranging between 1-5 cm. Patient refusing to participate, not able to give informed consent, with history of intra-abdominal surgery contraindicating a robotic surgical approach will be excluded. The intervention will consist in laparoscopic robotically assisted trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal epigastric or umbilical PVHR with closure of fascial defect and non-adsorbable mesh reinforcement. The control will be open pre-peritoneal epigastric or umbilical hernia repair with closure of fascial defect and non-absorbable mesh reinforcement. The primary outcome will be the incidence of wound-related complication within 1 month. The secondary outcomes will be esthetic satisfaction, pain, pain-killers consumption, general complications, costs, operative time and early hernia recurrence. DISCUSSION: Open PVHR is potentially associated to more wound-related complications, but has the advantages of cost-effectiveness, short operative time and totally extra-peritoneal repair. Laparoscopic PVHR has lower wound-related complications but implies placing the mesh in intra-peritoneal position, requires advanced laparoscopic skills, usually does not allow the closure of the defect, and can lead to excessive pain and pain-killers consumption. Robotic PVHR uses the same laparoscopic access as laparoscopic PVHR, but thanks to the extended range of motion given by the robotic system, allows defect closure, pre-peritoneal placement of the mesh and requires less technical skills.In the present randomized controlled trial, we expect to show that robotic PVHR leads to better wound-related outcomes than open PVHR.
trial registrationThe present randomized controlled trial was registered into clinicaltrials.gov under registration number NCT04171921.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.