ArticleUpdates in surgery2026
Comparative study on safety and efficacy of transabdominal preperitoneal prosthesis (TAPP) versus total laparoscopic sublay repair for ventral hernias: a single-center, retrospective cohort study.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal minimally invasive technique for ventral hernia repair remains debated. This study aimed to compare the perioperative and short-term outcomes between Transabdominal Preperitoneal (TAPP) repair and Totally Extraperitoneal Sublay (TES) repair for ventral hernias. Retrospective cohort study. A retrospective analysis of 16 patients who underwent elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair (TAPP, n = 9; TES, n = 7) between June 2023 and August 2025 was conducted. Patient demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. The TES group was associated with significantly larger defect sizes (28.7 vs. 14.3 mm, p < 0.05) and higher BMI (27.9 vs. 23.4, p < 0.05). Consequently, TES procedures required longer operative time (mean difference 75.1 min, 95% CI 31.2-119.0, p = 0.002) and resulted in greater estimated blood loss (9.4 mL; mean difference 57.7 mL, 95% CI 28.4-87.0, p = 0.001). All TES patients required drain placement, whereas no TAPP patient did (p < 0.001). Hospital stay was slightly longer in the TES group (4.3 days; mean difference -1.2 days, 95% CI -2.3 to -0.1, p = 0.032). There were no significant differences in total cost, seroma, hematoma, or recurrence rates between the two groups. In this cohort, TES was more frequently used for larger ventral hernias and was associated with longer operative times and greater blood loss, largely attributable to case complexity. TAPP repair was associated with efficient management and faster recovery in smaller hernias. However, given the extremely limited sample size and significant baseline differences, these observed trends should be interpreted with caution and considered primarily descriptive and hypothesis-generating, rather than as evidence of comparative superiority. The choice of technique should be tailored to individual patient and hernia characteristics, and future adequately powered studies are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42635714What 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.