Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41511872›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of surgery2025

Robotic versus laparoscopic minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair: randomized clinical trial (the ROGER trial).

Fiorenzo V Angehrn, Julian Süsstrunk, Romano Schneider, Kaspar Baltzer, Beat P Müller, Johannes Baur, Daniel C Steinemann

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of 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 NCT05216276 (Robotic Versus Conventional Minimal-invasive Inguinal Hernia Repair - a Prospective, Randomized and Blinded Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

NCT05216276 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

Robotic Versus Conventional Minimal-invasive Inguinal Hernia Repair - a Prospective, Randomized and Blinded Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandRan2022 to 2025Enrolled182ConditionsHernia, Inguinal, Robotic Surgical ProceduresArmsTEP, rTAPP
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Fiorenzo V AngehrnClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Digestive Health Care Centre, St Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5450-3100
Julian SüsstrunkClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Digestive Health Care Centre, St Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Romano SchneiderClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Digestive Health Care Centre, St Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Kaspar BaltzerClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Digestive Health Care Centre, St Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Beat P MüllerClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Digestive Health Care Centre, St Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Johannes BaurClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Digestive Health Care Centre, St Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Daniel C SteinemannClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Digestive Health Care Centre, St Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

Intuitive SurgicalSàrl
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuperiority of robotic inguinal hernia repair compared with a laparoscopic minimally invasive approach remains unproven. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative pain after laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal repair (TEP) compared with robotic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (rTAPP).

methodsThis was a prospective, patient- and investigator-blinded, two-group, single-centre RCT conducted at a tertiary Swiss healthcare institution including 182 patients undergoing elective primary inguinal hernia repair. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 and stratified according to BMI and unilateral or bilateral hernia to either TEP or rTAPP. Surgery took place between March 2022 and November 2024. The primary endpoint was postoperative pain while coughing 24 h after surgery. Surgical workload (assessed using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index (TLX)) was also recorded.

resultsIn total, 91 patients (93% male, mean(s.d.) age of 56.8(15.2) years, mean(s.d.) BMI of 24.8(3) kg/m2, and 22% with bilateral hernias) were randomized to TEP and 91 patients (95% male, mean(s.d.) age of 55.1(14.5) years, mean(s.d.) BMI of 24.6(2.9) kg/m2, and 21% with bilateral hernias) were randomized to rTAPP. Primary outcome data were available for 90 TEP patients and 88 rTAPP patients. The median postoperative pain while coughing on a numeric rating scale 24 h after surgery was 5 (interquartile range (i.q.r.) 2-7) after TEP and 4 (i.q.r. 2-7) after rTAPP (P = 0.431, Cohen's d = 0.12). The mean(s.d.) operating time for unilateral hernias was 64.2(19.2) min for TEP and 80.3(20.9) min for rTAPP (P < 0.001). Ten (11%) postoperative complications occured after TEP and nine (10%) after rTAPP (P > 0.999). The mean(s.d.) NASA raw TLX score was 34.0(17.2) after TEP and 18.4(10.7) after rTAPP (P < 0.001).

conclusionrTAPP demonstrated no superiority over TEP regarding postoperative pain and complication rates. rTAPP was associated with a reduced surgeon workload at the expense of a longer operating time. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05216276 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Indexed as

Hernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyLaparoscopyPostoperative PainRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeProspective StudiesSingle-Blind MethodTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID41511872
PMCPMC12785885

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.