Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40035894›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025

Robotic versus open ventral hernia repair (ROVHR): a randomized controlled trial protocol.

Alvaro C Carvalho, Kimberly P Woo, Ryan C Ellis, Chao Tu, Benjamin T Miller, Ajita S Prabhu, Michael J Rosen, David M Krpata, Clayton C Petro, Lucas R Beffa

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05472987 (Robotic Versus Open Ventral Hernia Repair), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05472987 narecruitingnot on this map

Robotic Versus Open Ventral Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorLucas BeffaRan2022 to 2027Enrolled200ConditionsVentral HerniaArmsVentral Hernia Repair
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Advances, Overuse, and Shared Decision-Making in Abdominal Wall Surgery.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Alvaro C CarvalhoDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA. carvala3@ccf.org.ORCID 0009-0006-9998-3167
Kimberly P WooDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Ryan C EllisDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Chao TuQuantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Benjamin T MillerDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Ajita S PrabhuDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Michael J RosenDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.
David M KrpataDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Clayton C PetroDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Lucas R BeffaDepartment of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobotic retromuscular hernia repair has proven to be feasible and safe but lacks randomized data to demonstrate significant clinical benefit. The majority of current comparative studies published have been case series, retrospective studies, systematic reviews, or large registry data, all of which have significant limitations and bias (Bittner et al. in Surg Endosc 32:727-734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5729-0 , 2018; Bracale et al in Hernia 25:1471-1480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-021-02487-5 , 2021; Carbonell in Ann Surg 267:210-217. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002244 , 2018; (Warren et al. in Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11202-1 , 2024; Dewulf et al in BJS Open 6:zrac057. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrac057 , 2022; Maskal and Beffa in Surg Clin N Am 103:977-991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2023.04.007 , 2023). It was only recently that the first randomized trial was conducted by Warren et al. comparing open and robotic retromuscular hernia repairs with synthetic mesh (Warren et al. in Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11202-1 , 2024). The data currently available has yielded inconsistent outcomes leaving significant knowledge gaps for clinical decision making. Reduced length of stay for robotic retromuscular repairs has been a consistently proven outcome, however, and therefore, we hypothesized that robotic retromuscular hernia repairs would be superior to open retromuscular hernia repair by reducing length of stay in the hospital by 24 h (Carbonell in Ann Surg 267:210-217. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002244 , 2018).

methodsThe Institutional Review Board at all participating sites has approved this protocol. This trial has been registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT: 05472987). The ROVHR trial is a registry-based, multicenter, double-blinded randomized trial. The primary hypothesis is robotic retromuscular hernia repairs is superior to open retromuscular hernia repairs by reducing length of stay by at least 24 h. Secondary outcomes include 30-day wound morbidity, readmissions, opioids prescribed and consumed, NRS-11 pain scores obtained daily for the 5 first days after surgery, PROMIS-3a Pain Intensity survey, and patient reported outcomes including Hernia-Related Quality of Life (HerQLes), and EuraHS. Additionally, direct operating room costs will be compared. DISCUSSION: Based existing literature, we designed a randomized trial with a primary endpoint to determine if robotic retromuscular hernia repairs reduce length of in hospital stay by at least 24 h compared to open retromuscular hernia repairs. This study will add high-level of evidence providing evidence-based outcomes for clinical decision making.

trial registrationNCT05472987. Registered on July 20, 2022.

Indexed as

Hernia, VentralHerniorrhaphyRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicOpen ventral herniaRetromuscular repairRobotic ventral herniaVentral hernia

Identifiers

PMID40035894
PMCPMC11880124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.