ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Multisite hernia treatment: the robotic approach makes it feasible.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of robotic surgery for combined abdominal wall hernias, including multiquadrant hernias, is underexplored in the literature. While the prevalence of simultaneous hernias is not well documented, they represent a frequent clinical challenge. Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a robotic approach for treating simultaneous epigastric, umbilical, incisional, and inguinal hernias. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively maintained dataset of abdominal wall hernias to identify patients treated for combined hernias (i.e., incisional/umbilical/epigastric and inguinal). Patients were divided into two groups based on the robotic docking technique, and the data were analyzed. Results: From January 2020 to December 2024, 30 patients underwent robotic combined hernia repair. Ninety percent were male, with a median age of 64.0 years (56.3-73.3). Most patients (56.7%) had an ASA score of 2. Single docking was feasible for 9 of 30 patients with midline hernias with median diameter of 2.0 cm (1.6-3.0) combined with an unilateral inguinal hernia. Double docking was necessary for 70% of patients with wider midline hernia defect with median diameter of 3.0 cm (2.0-5.0) or bilateral inguinal hernias. No intraoperative complications or conversions were reported. The median operative time was 158.0 min (141.0-160.0) for the single docking and 238.0 min (178.0-268.8) for the double docking and the median hospital stay was 2.0 days (2.0-2.0) for the single docking and 3.0 days (2.0-3.0) for the double docking. The morbidity rate was 11.1% for the single docking and 23.8% for the double docking, only one reintervention was needed in the double docking group. Most of the complications in both groups were seromas or hematomas, managed conservatively. At a median follow-up of 15.6 months (6.6-30.4), no recurrences were observed. Conclusions: Robotic combined hernia repair is a safe and effective minimally invasive option. Single docking offers advantages but is limited to patients with midline defects combined with unilateral inguinal hernias. For midline defects combined with bilateral inguinal hernias, double docking is generally required.
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.