ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Patient-reported outcomes in robotic vs. open transversus abdominis release.
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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Open versus robotic transversus abdominis release for ventral hernia repair: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Mapping the scientific landscape of robotic hernia repair: a bibliometric and topic modeling analysis of thematic transitions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Research hotspots and trends of robotic hernia repair: a bibliometric analysis (2005-2025).Journal of robotic surgery · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLarge abdominal wall defects are increasingly repaired robotically using bilateral component separation and myofascial release. Existing studies on complication rates and operative variables fail to capture the patient experience, creating a gap in our understanding of how transversus abdominis releases (TAR) impact quality of life (QoL). Using two validated hernia-specific tools, the Hernia-Related Quality-of-life Survey (HerQLes) and the Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS), we compared improvements in patient-reported outcomes between the two approaches.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled patients undergoing elective bilateral Open (O-TAR) or Robotic (R-TAR) TAR between 2019 and 2023. HerQLes scores 21 days preoperatively and 7, 30, and 180 days postoperatively were collected, as were CCS scores 7, 30, and 180 days postoperative. The primary outcome measure was the mean percent change in HerQLes and CCS scores from pre- to postoperative assessments.
resultsA total of 99 patients consented to participate, with final analysis including those who completed at least one survey: 49 O-TAR and 26 R-TAR. Initial HerQLes scores were significantly higher in the O-TAR cohort (62.95 vs. 48.72, p = 0.001), but both cohorts reported similar total average scores at 6 months (31.4 vs. 24.6, p = 0.29). Mean percent changes in HerQLes scores post-surgery were comparable between groups at 7, 30, and 180 days. Similarly, there were no significant differences in mean percent changes in CCS scores at 30 and 180 days compared to 1-week post-surgery.
conclusionsLarge abdominal wall defects pose QoL restraints on patients, especially those not candidates for minimally invasive repairs. Our data suggest that patients who undergo either open or robotic TAR have significant improvement in reported quality of life. While surgeons should continue to use patient and hernia factors to determine whether patients are candidates for O-TAR or R-TAR, surgeons can assure patients they are likely to have significant improvements in their QOL 6 months after surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40905967What 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.