Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32500458›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

Transabdominal (TA) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair: a propensity score matching analysis.

Omar Yusef Kudsi, Karen Chang, Naseem Bou-Ayash, Fahri Gokcal

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Robotic Surgical Procedures for Ventral Hernia Repair.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Omar Yusef KudsiGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6723-0909
Karen ChangGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1227-2911
Naseem Bou-AyashGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1102-9170
Fahri GokcalGood Samaritan Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, One Pearl Street, Brockton, MA, 02301, USA. fahidr@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-0832-7991
Tufts University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRetromuscular mesh placement positioning utilizing the robotic platform can be performed using either a transabdominal or an extraperitoneal approach. The aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of robotic transabdominal access retromuscular (rTA-RM) repair and robotic totally extraperitoneal access retromuscular (rTEP-RM) repair for ventral hernias

methodsPatients who underwent robotic retromuscular repair between February 2013-October 2019 were included in the study. A one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted to obtain two balanced groups. A comparative analysis was performed in terms of perioperative and early post-operative outcomes.

resultsA total of 214 patients were included for PSM analysis. 82 patients were allocated into each study group. Operative times were longer in rTA-RM group. Adhesiolysis was more frequently required in the rTA-RM group. Intra-operative complications occurred more frequently in patients who underwent rTA-RM repair (p = 0.120; 4.9% in rTA-RM vs. 0% in rTEP-RM). The rate of major complications during the first 90 days did not differ between groups (p = 0.277; 7.3% vs. 2.4%, respectively). The proportion of patients with minor perioperative complications was statistically higher in the rTA-RM group than the rTEP-RM group (p = 0.003; 30.5% vs. 11%, respectively). Overall rate of surgical site events was higher in the rTA-RM group than the rTEP-RM group (p = 0.049; 17.1% vs. 6.1%, respectively). Seroma frequency was higher after rTA-RM repair (p = 0.047; 13.4% vs. 3.7%).

conclusionOur data suggest that rTEP-RM repair was associated with shorter surgery duration and improved early post-operative outcomes in comparison with rTA-RM repair.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleHernia, VentralHerniorrhaphyHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreProspective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresSeromaTreatment OutcomeRetromuscularRobotic ventral hernia repairTEPTotally extraperitonealTransabdominal

Identifiers

PMID32500458
OpenAlexW3033408327

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.