Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37347343›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023

A cost-conscious establishment of a robotic abdominal wall reconstruction program in a publicly funded healthcare system.

Rachel Q Liu Hennessey, Yuwei Yang, Adam T Meneghetti, O Neely M Panton, Chieh Jack Chiu

Abstract read
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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Costing methodologies in robotic ventral hernia repair: a scoping review.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025
    Article
  4. Comment to: Cost analysis of open versus robot-assisted ventral hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    Article
  5. Cost analysis of open versus robot-assisted ventral hernia repair - a retrospective cohort study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    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

5 authors.

Rachel Q Liu HennesseyDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. rachel@hnsy.ca.ORCID 0000-0003-0699-8361
Yuwei YangDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Adam T MeneghettiDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
O Neely M PantonDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Chieh Jack ChiuDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDespite reports of better short-term outcomes, the main criticism for the adoption of the robotic surgery platform for abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) has been the associated cost, especially in countries with a publicly funded healthcare system such as Canada. We describe our experience in implementation of robotic AWR while ensuring cost-effectiveness.

methodsThis is a retrospective cohort analysis of all patients with ventral hernias ranging between 5 to 15 cm who underwent either open or robotic AWR between January 2020 to August 2022. We reviewed patient characteristics, operative time, post-operative length of stay (LOS), and average cost of surgery.

results45 patients underwent open repair and 28 underwent robotic repair in the study period. There was no difference in major patient characteristics between the two groups. Operative time was shorter for open repairs (233.2 ± 96.6 min vs. 299.3 ± 71.8 min, p < 0.001). LOS was significantly longer for open repairs (5 days (interquartile range = 4-6) vs. 2 days (IQR = 1.75-3), p < 0.001) and there were significantly more patients who underwent robotic repair who left hospital in less than 3 days (13.3 vs. 64.3%, p < 0.001). The average overall hospital-based cost for each open repair was $26,952.18 when the cost for equipment, operative time, inpatient hospital stay, and epidural use are accounted for, compared to $17,447.40 for robotic repair ($9,504.78 saving per case).

conclusionWith proper selection of patients based on size of hernia, we demonstrate cost conscious adaptation of the robotic technology to AWR. Our future studies will continue to explore the benefits and limits of this approach in complex hernia repair.

Indexed as

Abdominal WallHernia, VentralLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresHerniorrhaphyHumansRetrospective StudiesSurgical MeshCost analysisPublic healthcare fundingRobotic abdominal wall reconstructionRobotic ventral hernia repair

Identifiers

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.