Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36422725›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023

Robotic versus open lateral abdominal hernia repair: a multicenter propensity score matched analysis of perioperative and 1-year outcomes.

X Pereira, D L Lima, L-C Huang, R Salas-Parra, P Shah, F Malcher, P Sreeramoju

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Incisional hernia repair following pancreatic surgery-open vs laparoscopic approach.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

X PereiraDepartment of Surgery, NYU Langone Health, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6247-7523
D L LimaDepartment of Surgery, Montefiore Medical, The Bronx 2nd Floor Bronx 1825 Eastchester Rd, NY, 10461, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7383-1284
L-C HuangDepartment of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5959-7097
R Salas-ParraDepartment of Surgery, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New Hyde Park, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8960-266X
P ShahDepartment of Surgery, NYU Langone Health, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1353-2474
F MalcherDepartment of Surgery, NYU Langone Health, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1644-9921
P SreeramojuDepartment of Surgery, Montefiore Medical, The Bronx 2nd Floor Bronx 1825 Eastchester Rd, NY, 10461, USA. Psreeram@montefiore.org.ORCID 0000-0002-4856-4556

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLateral abdominal hernias are inherently challenging surgical entities. As such, there has been an increase in the adoption of robotic platforms to approach these challenging hernias. Our study aims to assess and compare outcomes between open (oLAHR) and robotic (rLAHR) lateral abdominal hernia repair using a national hernia-specific database.

methodsA retrospective review of prospectively collected data from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative was performed to include all adult patients who underwent elective lateral hernia repair. A propensity score match analysis was conducted, and univariate analyses were conducted to compare these two surgical modalities across perioperative timeframes.

resultsThe database identified 2569 patients. Our analysis matched 665 patients to either the open or robotic groups. The median length of stay, surgical site occurrences (SSO), and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural interventions (SSOPI) were higher in the oLAHR versus the rLAHR group. Overall, oLAHR had a significantly higher rate of having any post-operative complications or any SSO/SSOPI. There was no difference in quality-of-life measures between groups at 30 days and 1 year.

conclusionRobotic abdominal hernia repair is a safe alternative compared to the open repair of lateral abdominal hernias with better perioperative outcomes. Despite having a longer operative time, the robotic approach can offer a significantly shorter length of stay and an overall lower rate of complications. Ultimately, there is no difference in the quality-of-life measures both at 30 days and 1 year between the open and robotic approaches.

Indexed as

Hernia, VentralLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAbdominal MusclesAdultHerniorrhaphyHumansPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesSurgical MeshACHQCLateral herniaLumbar herniaRobotic Hernia RepairRobotic Surgery

Identifiers

PMID36422725

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.