Trial reportHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2026
Open versus robotic-assisted repair of midline ventral hernias with defect width 2-8 cm - a randomized clinical trial (OVER).
Trial report in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05906017 (Open Versus Robotic-assisted Ventral Hernia Repair, Short and Long-term Outcome), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Open Versus Robotic-assisted Ventral Hernia Repair, Short and Long-term Outcome
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeTo compare short-term clinical outcomes, inflammatory response, and patient-reported quality of life after open versus robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (oVHR vs. rVHR).
methodsThis randomized controlled trial included adults with midline ventral hernias (2–8 cm). Patients were randomized to oVHR or rVHR. The primary endpoint was postoperative length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included operative time, complications, quality of life, and inflammatory response measured by CRP. The primary outcome was analyzed using Poisson regression adjusted for defect size, repeated measures with linear mixed-effects models, and binary outcomes with logistic regression.
resultsFifty-six patients were analyzed (rVHR = 29, oVHR = 27). Median operative time was longer for rVHR (129 min) than oVHR (80 min, p < 0.001). Mean LOS was significantly shorter after rVHR (0.46 days, 95 % CI 0.21–0.72) than oVHR (1.96 days, 95 % CI 1.43–2.49, p < 0.001). The benefit increased with defect size, corresponding to a predicted one-day difference at 17 cm². Postoperative CRP levels were lower after rVHR on both day 1 (23 vs 46 mg/L, p < 0.001) and day 3 (33 vs 70 mg/L, p < 0.001). Complication rates were similar (21 % vs 26 %, p = 0.6). Quality-of-life improvements at 3 and 6 months were comparable between groups.
conclusionRobotic-assisted ventral hernia repair was associated with shorter hospitalization particularly for larger defects. The surgical stress response was also significantly lower following rVHR, but with longer operative time and no differences in complications or patient-reported outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05906017, registered May 23 2023.
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.