ReviewSurgery today2022
Current status and future perspectives of robotic inguinal hernia repair.
Review in Surgery today, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- First United States experience of robotic-assisted minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair using the Dexter surgical system.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair Is Feasible and Efficient: A Prospective Cohort Study of a Day-Only Protocol From a High-Volume Robotic Surgery Centre Evaluating Short-Term Outcomes.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- A Simple Procedure for Mesh Suture Fixation in Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Technical Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Robotic parastomal hernia repair: A single-center cohort study.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Robotic Assisted Hernia Repair in Four Nordic Countries - Status and Challenges.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2024Article
- Current status and future perspectives of robotic inguinal hernia repair.Surgery today · 2022Review
- How to Establish the Bipolar Forceps Dissection Method in Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Article
- Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With more than 5500 da Vinci Surgical System (DVSS) installed worldwide, the robotic approach for general surgery, including for inguinal hernia repair, is gaining popularity in the USA. However, in many countries outside the USA, robotic surgery is performed at only a few advanced institutions; therefore, its advantages over the open or laparoscopic approaches for inguinal hernia repair are unclear. Several retrospective studies have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of robotic inguinal hernia repair, but there is still no firm evidence to support the superiority of robotic surgery for this procedure or its long-term clinical outcomes. Robotic surgery has the potential to overcome the disadvantages of conventional laparoscopic surgery through appropriate utilization of technological advantages, such as wristed instruments, tremor filtering, and high-resolution 3D images. The potential benefits of robotic inguinal hernia repair are lower rates of complications or recurrence than open and laparoscopic surgery, with less postoperative pain, and a rapid learning curve for surgeons. In this review, we summarize the current status and future prospects of robotic inguinal hernia repair and discuss the issues associated with this procedure.
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.