ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022
Results of robotic TAPP and conventional laparoscopic TAPP in an outpatient setting: a cohort study in Switzerland.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic TAPP for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and GRADE assessment.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes from robotic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair in patients under and over 70 years old: a single institution retrospective cohort study with a comprehensive systematic review on behalf of TROGSS - The Robotic Global Surgical Society.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic surgery for inguinal and ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Article
- Neural Minimum-Distance Estimation for Collision-Aware Operation of Multi-Arm Laparoscopy Surgical Robots Through Learning-from-Simulation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques in the Treatment of Appendicitis: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- A Systematic Review of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair: Management of Inguinal Hernias in the 21st Century.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Robotic minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair with the Dexter robotic system™: A prospective multicenter clinical investigation.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Review
- Abdominal Wall Hernias-State of the Art of Laparoscopic versus Robotic Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Comparison of modified tumescent and conventional laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a retrospective clinical study.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRecently, robotic surgery has been increasingly performed in hernia surgery. Although feasibility and safety of robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair in an inpatient setting have been already shown, its role in outpatient hernia surgery has not yet been investigated. Thus, this study aimed to compare robot-assisted TAPP (r-TAPP) and conventional laparoscopic TAPP (l-TAPP) in an outpatient setting.
methodsA prospective database of patients with inguinal hernia treated by l-TAPP or r-TAPP in an outpatient setting during a 1-year period was analyzed in a comparative cohort study. All patients underwent a check-up appointment with their surgeon within 3 days and 6 weeks postoperatively. Data on surgical time, perioperative complications, and postoperative pain were collected. Pain was recorded by using a Verbal Rating Scale (VRS).
resultsOverall, outpatient laparoendoscopic inguinal hernia repair was performed in 58 patients (29 l-TAPP; 29 r-TAPP). Mean age was 57 years (21-81), mean BMI 24.5 kg/m2 (19-33) with no differences between both groups. Most patients reported none or only a low postoperative pain level in both groups (89.6% in l-TAPP group; 100% in r-TAPP), while there was a trend for less pain after r-TAPP. In both groups, there was one case of postoperative hematoma, which was successfully treated by conservative means. No other complications occurred during follow-up in either group and there was no 30-day-readmission, no unplanned overstay or any 30-day mortality in the cohort.
conclusionRobot-assisted inguinal hernia surgery can be safely performed in an outpatient setting with a tendency to less pain when compared to the conventional laparoscopic technique. Cost-effectiveness and cost-coverage of outpatient robot-assisted inguinal hernia surgery must be further investigated in times of limited health cost resources and diagnosis-related medical reimbursements.
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.