ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Robotic Pauli repair of parastomal hernia.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Endoscopic totally extraperitoneal repair for parastomal hernia using the ePauli technique.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Hybrid parastomal endoscopic repair (HyPER): a retrospective case series of 200 patients treated over ten years at a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic parastomal hernia repair with reinforced tissue matrix; lessons learned from our 74-patient cohort.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic retro-muscular mesh repair of parastomal hernia (PH) is possible with transversus abdominis release. The aim of this study is to report mid-term results with this method.
methodsPatients who underwent surgery for PH were enrolled in a prospective study. Patients with concomitant midline hernia also underwent Rives repair. Polypropylene meshes with an absorbable buffer mesh were used in the retro-muscular pocket-except PTFE was chosen for inflammatory bowel disease patients. Follow-up was by telephone and physical examination and CT if suspicion of complication.
resultsOf the 56 included ostomy patients, 44 had colostomies, 10 had ileostomies, and two had urostomies. Thirty-nine percent had a concomitant hernia, and 25% had recurrent PH. The mean operating time without accessory repair was 156 min (SD 37), and with accessory repairs 220 min (SD 62). One bowel lesion and one vascular injury to the stoma occurred, prompting intraoperative stoma revision without postoperative morbidity. Postoperative complications ensued in 12 patients (23%). One patient had stoma necrosis after 3 weeks and the stoma was relocated. One patient had a mesh infection, 3 patients temporary ileus, one patient hypovolemic renal failure, and two patients experienced a flare-up of their Crohn's Disease. One parastomal abscess was drained percutaneously. The median postoperative stay was 3 days (1-21; mean 3.7 days), and the readmission rate was 8.9%. The recurrence rate at mean and median 24 months follow-up is 5.4%, two in ileostomy patients and one colostomy patient with unaltered bulging where CT shows a relatively large prolapse and recorded as a failure.
conclusionRobotic Pauli repair has shown promising results. However, repair fails of PH at small bowel ostomies with short mesentery. ePauli/TAR is now the preliminary choice for eligible patients at our site. Comparative studies with the intraperitoneal mesh standard are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39225795What 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.