Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41307707›Full record

Trial reportHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025

Robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair - a detailed economic evaluation: is it worth it?

Kristian Als Nielsen, Alexandros Valorenzos, Karsten Kaiser, Cathrine Häbel Frandsen, Per Helligsø, Sofie Ronja Petersen, Mark Bremholm Ellebaek, Michael Festersen Nielsen

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Time distribution and intraoperative workflow in complex midline incisional hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Observational
  5. 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

8 authors.

Kristian Als NielsenDepartment of General Surgery, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kresten Philipsens Vej 15, Aabenraa, 6200, Denmark. kristian.als.nielsen3@rsyd.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-7409-6506
Alexandros ValorenzosDepartment of General Surgery, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kresten Philipsens Vej 15, Aabenraa, 6200, Denmark.
Karsten KaiserDepartment of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Kresten Philipsens Vej 15, Aabenraa, 6200, Denmark.
Cathrine Häbel FrandsenDepartment of General Surgery, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kresten Philipsens Vej 15, Aabenraa, 6200, Denmark.
Per HelligsøDepartment of General Surgery, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kresten Philipsens Vej 15, Aabenraa, 6200, Denmark.
Sofie Ronja PetersenDepartment of Clinical Research, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kresten Philipsens Vej, Aabenraa, 6200, Denmark.
Mark Bremholm EllebaekDepartment of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Michael Festersen NielsenDepartment of General Surgery, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kresten Philipsens Vej 15, Aabenraa, 6200, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Hernia, VentralHerniorrhaphyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHospital CostsHumansMaleMiddle AgedCost analysisHealthcare economicsRobot-assisted surgeryVentral hernia repair

Identifiers

PMID41307707
PMCPMC12660387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.