Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35608687›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022

Results of robotic TAPP and conventional laparoscopic TAPP in an outpatient setting: a cohort study in Switzerland.

Stephan Gerdes, Reint Burger, Georg Liesch, Barbara Freitag, Michele Serra, René Vonlanthen, Marco Bueter, Andreas Thalheimer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephan GerdesDepartment of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Zürich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zürich, Switzerland.
Reint BurgerDepartment of Surgery, Spital Männedorf, Asylstrasse 10, CH-8708, Männedorf, Switzerland.
Georg LieschDepartment of Surgery, Spital Männedorf, Asylstrasse 10, CH-8708, Männedorf, Switzerland.
Barbara FreitagDepartment of Surgery, Spital Männedorf, Asylstrasse 10, CH-8708, Männedorf, Switzerland.
Michele SerraDepartment of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Zürich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zürich, Switzerland.
René VonlanthenDepartment of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Zürich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zürich, Switzerland.
Marco BueterDepartment of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Zürich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zürich, Switzerland.
Andreas ThalheimerDepartment of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Zürich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zürich, Switzerland. a.thalheimer@spitalmaennedorf.ch.
University Hospital of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Hernia, InguinalLaparoscopyRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresCohort StudiesHerniorrhaphyHumansMiddle AgedOutpatientsPostoperative PainSurgical MeshSwitzerlandTreatment OutcomeInguinal herniaLaparoendoscopic inguinal hernia surgeryOutpatientRobotic-assisted

Identifiers

PMID35608687
PMCPMC9468071
OpenAlexW4281390970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.