ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Incisional hernias following robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: does the extraction site matter?
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Off-midline versus supraumbilical specimen extraction sites in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.BJU international · 2026Article
- Incisional Hernia after Robotic Urological Surgery.Current urology reports · 2025Review
- Rectus diastasis is a risk factor for incisional hernia after robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incidence of incisional hernia (IH) following robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) varies widely within the literature (0.4-9.7%). Whilst small hernias may go unnoticed, the potential exists for bowel strangulation and subsequent emergency surgery. We suggest that the extraction site may influence the rate of IH. A retrospective chart review of a single surgeon RALP series was undertaken. One hundred charts were sampled, of which 69 had sufficient data to be analysed. Prior to July 2017, specimen extraction had been via the supra-umbilical port site. After this time, specimens were extracted via a Pfannenstiel incision. Of the 69 patients, 24 underwent RALP prior to July 2017. Three patients developed IH at the supra-umbilical port extended for extraction site in the pre-2017 group and three patients developed IH at the supra-umbilical port (not extraction) site in the post-2017 group. The rate of IH was almost double in the pre-July 2017 group (12.5% vs. 6.7%). No patient developed an incisional hernia at the Pfannenstiel site in the post-2017 group. In our series, no patient developed a hernia at the Pfannenstiel site. This is in keeping with the reported < 1% IH rate following Pfannenstiel specimen extraction. Given that incisional hernias are a known complication of robotic surgery, thought should be given to changing the site of specimen extraction site to lower the rate of incisional hernias and the morbidity associated with such.
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.