ArticleUpdates in surgery2024
Robotic parastomal hernia repair: A single-center cohort study.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic-assisted surgery for parastomal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Minimally Invasive Versus Open Parastomal Hernia Repair: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World journal of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Beyond acronyms: a domain-based structural analysis of abdominal wall hernia repair techniques in the contemporary literature.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- How Reproducible Are Abdominal Wall Surgical Techniques? A Methodological Assessment of Technical Reporting in the Contemporary Literature.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Article
- Parastomal Hernia Repair: A Four-Year Single-Centre Experience With Elective and Emergency Outcomes.Cureus · 2025Article
- Robotic parastomal hernia repair in Ileal-conduit patients: short-term results in a single-center cohort study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parastomal hernia is a common occurrence following stoma construction, necessitating surgical intervention in symptomatic cases. This study presents a comprehensive analysis of Robotic-Assisted Parastomal Hernia Repair (r-PSHR), utilizing the Da Vinci Xi™ Surgical System. Retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing r-PSHR at a high-volume center. Surgical variables, complications, and recurrence rates were assessed. The primary technique involved a modified Sugarbaker intraperitoneal onlay mesh. Eighty-six patients underwent r-PSHR, predominantly females (59.3%), with mean age 60.8 years. Mean BMI was 31.0. Most patients were classified as ASA 2 (31.4%) or ASA 3 (65.1), with 64.6% having no prior PSH repair. Index procedures primarily involved laparoscopic colonic resections (27.8%) and open abdominoperineal resections (27.8%). Parastomal hernias were mainly associated with end ileostomy (50%) and end colostomy (47.7%). A hybrid modification was required in 22.1% of cases, with only one conversion to open repair. Mean operative time was 257 min. Thirty-day morbidity was 40.7% and includes ileus (24.4%), deep surgical-site infections (7.0%), acute kidney injury (5.8%), and sepsis (5.8%). Grade IIIB complications occurred in 5.8% of cases. Thirty-day readmissions were observed in 19.8% of cases. There were five cases (5.8%) of recurrence within 15 months post-surgery. This study highlights the effectiveness of r-PSHR in managing parastomal hernia. R-PSHR shows promising outcomes with an acceptable post-operative occurrence profile and a favorable recurrence rate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39223401What 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.