Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32372155›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2021

A comparison of robotic mesh repair techniques for primary uncomplicated midline ventral hernias and analysis of risk factors associated with postoperative complications.

O Y Kudsi, K Chang, N Bou-Ayash, F Gokcal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Robotic transabdominal retromuscular rectus diastasis (r-TARRD) repair: a new approach.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

O Y KudsiGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA. omar.kudsi@tufts.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6723-0909
K ChangGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1227-2911
N Bou-AyashGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1102-9170
F GokcalGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0832-7991
Tufts University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aim to compare short-term outcomes of robotic intraperitoneal onlay (rIPOM), transabdominal preperitoneal (rTAPP) and retromuscular (rRM) repair for uncomplicated midline primary ventral hernias (PVH) and determine risk factors associated with postoperative complications.

methodsThe three groups were compared in terms of pre-, intra-, and post-operative variables. Postoperative complications were assessed using previously validated classifications. Univariate analyses were conducted to determine which variables influence postoperative complications (up to 90 days), followed by a multivariate regression analysis revealing statistically important risk factors.

resultsA total of 269 patients who underwent robotic PVH repair patients were grouped as rIPOM (n = 90), rTAPP (n = 108), and rRM (n = 71). rRM repair allowed for the use of larger-sized meshes for larger defects; however, it was associated with higher-grade complications. rTAPP repair resulted in the lowest morbidity and offered the highest mesh-to-defect ratio for smaller-sized hernias. Operative time for the rRM group was longer. The rIPOM group had a higher morbidity, likely due to higher frequency of minor complications, as compared to rTAPP and rRM groups. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that coronary artery disease, absence of defect closure, intraperitoneally placed mesh, and skin-to-skin time (minutes) were significantly associated with postoperative complications.

conclusionRobotic PVHR contributes multiple techniques to a surgeon's armamentarium, such as IPOM, TAPP, and RM mesh placements. Patient characteristics as well as the potential consequences of each technique need to be taken into consideration when deciding the appropriate approach for the repair of primary uncomplicated midline ventral hernias.

Indexed as

Hernia, VentralLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresHerniorrhaphyHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRisk FactorsSurgical MeshIPOMRetromuscularRobotic ventral hernia repairTAPPVentral hernia

Identifiers

PMID32372155
OpenAlexW3023208095

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.