Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37725188›Full record

SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

J A R Peñafiel, G Valladares, Amanda Cyntia Lima Fonseca Rodrigues, P Avelino, L Amorim, L Teixeira, G Brandao, F Rosa

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Incisional hernia repair trends in the last decade (2013-2023): an ACHQC analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Robotic-assisted surgical treatment of complex giant incisional hernias: A report of 3 cases.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

J A R PeñafielDepartment of Surgery, University of Cuenca, Cuenca, Ecuador.
G ValladaresDepartment of Mathematics, University Central of Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador. gabrieladerojas2010@gmail.com.
Amanda Cyntia Lima Fonseca RodriguesDepartment of Medicine, Positivo University, Curitiba, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1020-0060
P AvelinoDepartment of Surgery, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
L AmorimDepartment of Surgery, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
L TeixeiraDepartment of Surgery, University of UniEvangelica, Anapolis, Brazil.
G BrandaoDepartment of Surgery, Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
F RosaDepartment of Surgery, Instituto Tocantinense Presidente Antônio Carlos, Palmas, Tocantins, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety outcomes of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic techniques for incisional hernia repair.

methodsPubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane databases, and conference abstracts were systematically searched for studies that directly compared robot-assisted versus laparoscopy for incisional hernia repair and reported safety or efficacy outcomes in a follow-up of ≥ 1 month. The primary endpoints of interest were postoperative complications and the length of hospital stay.

resultsThe search strategy yielded 2104 results, of which four studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies included 1293 patients with incisional hernia repairs, 440 (34%) of whom underwent robot-assisted repair. Study follow-up ranged from 1 to 24 months. There was no significant difference between groups in the incidence of postoperative complications (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.35-1.21; p = 0.17). The recurrence rate of incisional hernias (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.05-2.29; p = 0.27) was also similar between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries. Hospital length of stay (MD - 1.05 days; 95% CI - 2.06, - 0.04; p = 0.04) was significantly reduced in the robotic-assisted repair. However, the robot-assisted repair had a significantly longer operative time (MD 69.6 min; 95% CI 59.0-80.1; p < 0.001).

conclusionThe robotic approach for incisional hernia repair was associated with a significant difference between the two groups in complications and recurrence rates, a longer operative time than laparoscopic repair, but with a shorter length of stay.

Indexed as

HerniorrhaphyIncisional HerniaLaparoscopyLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansOperative TimeRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeIncisional herniaLaparoscopic repairMinimally invasive surgeryRobotic-assisted surgery

Identifiers

PMID37725188

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.