SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic TAPP for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and GRADE assessment.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic versus open mesh-enforced retrorectus ventral hernia repair: a multi-center comparative study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Early Adoption of Technically Complex Robotic Ventral Hernia Repair in a Low-Volume Center: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis with Consecutive Open Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic transabdominal preperitoneal (R-TAPP) repair has gained increasing adoption in inguinal hernia surgery, yet its short-term clinical value relative to conventional laparoscopic TAPP (L-TAPP) remains debated. Although robotic platforms offer technical and ergonomic advantages, whether these translate into measurable patient-centered benefits is uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide an updated comparative evaluation of short-term safety, efficacy, economic impact, and surgeon workload between R-TAPP and L-TAPP. A systematic review adhering to PRISMA 2020 standards was conducted across five major databases from inception through September 2025. Randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies involving adult patients undergoing R-TAPP or L-TAPP were included. The primary endpoint was chronic postoperative inguinal pain. Secondary outcomes comprised operative duration, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, recurrence, readmission, reoperation, urinary outcomes, surgical site infection, procedural costs, and surgeon workload assessed using the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Risk of bias was evaluated using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools, and pooled analyses were performed using random-effects models. Fourteen independent studies (3 randomized trials and 11 cohort studies) encompassing 5,520 patients met the inclusion criteria. The incidence of chronic postoperative pain (n = 616) did not differ significantly between approaches (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.30–1.12; p = 0.11; I² = 0%). Robotic repair was associated with prolonged operative time (MD 10.93 min; 95% CI 4.18–17.67; p = 0.002). No statistically significant differences were observed in blood loss, hospital stay, overall morbidity, recurrence, readmission, reoperation, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, or surgical site infection. While total NASA-TLX scores were comparable, robotic surgery significantly reduced the surgeon’s physical workload. Procedural costs were consistently higher in the robotic cohort. R-TAPP provides short-term clinical outcomes comparable to L-TAPP but is associated with longer operative times and increased direct costs. Its principal advantage appears to lie in improved surgeon ergonomics rather than superior patient outcomes. Robotic repair may therefore be most appropriate in complex cases or high-volume centers with established expertise, whereas laparoscopic TAPP remains a cost-efficient standard for routine inguinal hernia repair.
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.