Trial reportHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025
Robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair - a detailed economic evaluation: is it worth it?
Trial report 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. Cited by 5 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
5 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
- Economic benefits of robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair in India: an analysis of health utility, productivity, and operational gains from the real-world ASPIRE INDIA study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Mapping the scientific landscape of robotic hernia repair: a bibliometric and topic modeling analysis of thematic transitions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Time distribution and intraoperative workflow in complex midline incisional hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Observational
- Article
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
purposeThe use of robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (rVHR) has expanded rapidly, but its economic viability remains debated. This study aimed to provide a transparent cost analysis of rVHR compared with open ventral hernia repair (oVHR), and to identify patient subgroups where rVHR may represent a cost-effective alternative.
methodsPatients with midline ventral hernias were randomized to rVHR or oVHR. A detailed bottom-up costing approach was applied, including preoperative, intraoperative, hospitalization, and post-hospitalization costs, as well as capital and maintenance costs of the robotic platform. Group-specific mean costs were estimated using log-linear regression models. Cost-consequence and cost-effectiveness analyses were performed, and an interaction model was used to explore cost differences in relation to hernia defect size.
resultsFifty-six patients were included (29 rVHR, 27 oVHR). Mean total hospital costs were significantly higher for rVHR (€3,539) compared with oVHR (€1,696; cost ratio 2.09, p <0.001). Instrumentation and consumables accounted for the largest share of rVHR costs, while hospitalization represented the largest component in oVHR. Modeling suggested a potential crossover point at a defect size of 56 cm², beyond which rVHR could become relatively more cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that robotic-assisted surgery required an additional €1,149 to reduce hospital stay by one day.
conclusionRobotic-assisted ventral hernia repair is associated with substantially higher costs than open repair in our setting. However, rVHR may represent a more cost-effective strategy for larger or more complex hernias, supporting selective use based on patient characteristics and institutional resources.
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.