ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Robotic surgery for giant paraesophageal hernias: a promising approach to improved outcomes.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current pharmacological and procedural treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: comprehensive review.BJS open · 2025Review
- Body mass index should be considered as an indicator for laparoscopic surgery or robot-assisted surgery selection in patients with hiatal hernia.Journal of thoracic disease · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Giant paraesophageal hernias (GPEH) present challenges in management and surgical technique. Laparoscopic repair has been the gold standard for GPEH repair. Despite technical advances in laparoscopy, complications and recurrence remain high. The da Vinci Surgical System has emerged as a way to improve upon the gold standard. The objective of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes of patients who underwent robotic GPEH repair in comparison to the clinical data in the literature on laparoscopic GPEH repair. We retrospectively reviewed patient records who underwent GPEH repair between November 2012 and February 2023 at a single high-volume tertiary care center. Perioperative data and patient outcomes were collected from a prospectively maintained database. Ninety-two patients underwent robotic GPEH repair. Sixty-seven had Type III hernias (72.8%) and twenty-five had Type IV hernias (27.2%). Four (4.3%) required conversion to open repair and two (2.2%) required reoperation for recurrence. Twelve (13.0%) experienced complications including one surgical complication (splenic laceration) and eleven medical complications (fever, ileus, pleural effusion, and heart failure exacerbation). There was no perioperative mortality. Mean operative time was 166.4 ± 29.5 min, and hospital stay was 5.8 ± 3.1 days. Obesity (BMI > 30) was associated with higher complication and recurrence rates. Robotic GPEH repair demonstrates promising outcomes, with lower recurrence rates and fewer postoperative complications compared to published data on laparoscopic repair. While a randomized control trial is needed to substantiate these results, our data support that a robotic approach could become the standard of care for GPEH repair.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40011317What 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.