ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Retrospective cost analysis of robotic and laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery and paraesophageal hernia repair.
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 8 papers, 3 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recovery-centered outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Adults undergoing robotic hiatal hernia repair: do surgical and patient factors predict 5-year revision? A systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic esophageal hiatal hernia and anti-reflux surgery: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Acute gastric volvulus: optimal timing for repair?Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted antireflux surgery: a matched cohort analysis of procedure costs and outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Current pharmacological and procedural treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: comprehensive review.BJS open · 2025Review
- Validation of the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator for patients with paraoesophageal hernias undergoing robotic repair.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgical Repair in Traumatic Diaphragmatic Hernia: A Systematic Review of 8,990 Patients.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIncreased adoption of robotics in foregut surgery evokes questions regarding efficacy, safety, and cost. To many, cost remains a barrier to adoption of a robotic approach. The authors' aim to determine the difference in cost of a robotic (R-) vs laparoscopic (L-) approach for paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR).
methodsPatients 18 years and older who underwent PEHR between July 2016 and June 2021 at a university health network were included. Variables of interest included 30 day outcomes, 1 year recurrence rates, and several cost variables including hospital length of stay, operating room (OR) time, chargeable supplies and implants, non-chargeable supplies, and indirect cost. Cost data were stratified by type and the presence of fundoplication, as well as the elective versus urgent nature of the procedures. Statistical analysis consisted of parametric and non-parametric analyses, with p < 0.05 denoting statistical significance.
results405 patients were included in the study (n = 188 for R-, n = 217 for L-). Significant differences were observed in the type of anti-reflux procedure performed (p < 0.001), use of mesh (R- 70.2% vs. L- 59.0%, p = 0.019), and whether a Collis gastroplasty was performed (R- 4.3% vs. L- 10.2%, p = 0.023). No differences in 30-day readmission or reoperation rates, Clavien-Dindo complication rates, or 1-year hernia recurrence rates were observed. For elective cases, regardless of the type of anti-reflux procedure performed, a robotic approach was associated with a significantly greater cost (p < 0.002). Comparing all procedures, a statistically significant increase in cost was seen with a robotic approach (R- $29,706.88 vs. L- $23,457.07, p < 0.001).
conclusionsComplication rates and surgical outcomes between the two approaches were similar; however, cost is significantly increased when a robotic approach is utilized. Future studies are needed to delineate which drivers of cost are modifiable with the robot.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39367133What 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.