ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Long-term patient reported outcomes after robotic, laparoscopic, and open ventral hernia repair.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Open versus robotic-assisted repair of midline ventral hernias with defect width 2-8 cm - a randomized clinical trial (OVER).Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Trial
- Pain outcomes in emergent versus elective ventral hernia repair: Propensity score matched analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- The Benign COMPARE Study: Comparing Perioperative Outcomes of Benign Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic, da Vinci Robotic, and Open Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Evidence.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Association of robotic surgical approach with decreased inpatient opioid exposure after abdominal wall reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Hernia mesh repair in immunocompromised patients: a comprehensive review.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic-assisted treatment of flank hernias with progressive intracorporeal fascial traction (PIFT): A novel technique for secure fascial adaptation.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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCurrent evidence demonstrates questionable incremental benefit of robotic abdominal wall (ventral) hernia repair when compared to other approaches. However, data are mainly limited to 30-day outcomes and do not capture long-term patient reported outcomes (PROs) where the robotic may provide distinct advantages.
methodsWe analyzed patients who underwent ventral hernia repair from January 2020-September 30, 2022 in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Core Optimization Hernia Registry (MSQC-COHR). Validated PROs included the Ventral Hernia Recurrence Inventory (VHRI), PROMIS Pain Intensity 3a (Pain 3a), and HerQLes quality of life measures. Survey weighting was employed to reduce non-response bias and balance respondents with the overall COHR population. Logistic regression was used to assess the relationship of operative approach with answering "Yes" to the 3 VHRI questions, reporting a worse than average Pain 3a score, and reporting a below median HerQLes score. Models accounted for patient, hernia, and operative characteristics.
resultsOur sample included 1583 patients undergoing hernia repair, of which 507 (32.0%) were robotic, 202 (12.8%) were laparoscopic, and 874 (55.2%) were open. Median follow up time was 1.3 years (IQR 1.2-1.5). Patient characteristics were similar across approaches. Robotic repairs were more often performed electively, on larger hernias, and with mesh. After controlling for covariates, a robotic approach was associated with a lower predicted probability of reporting a bulge [19.5% (95% CI 15.7-23.2%)] than a laparoscopic approach [26.8% (95% CI 20.4-33.2%)], but was no different than an open approach [18.8% (95% CI 16.1-21.6%)]. No other differences in PROs were found by approach.
conclusionsWe found a lower likelihood of reporting a bulge after robotic ventral hernia repair when compared with a laparoscopic approach, but no difference when compared with an open approach. No other differences in long-term PROs were found when comparing robotic to laparoscopic or open approaches.
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.