ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Access without excess: a comparison of wound infections with disposable versus hybrid trocars in minimally invasive inguinal hernia repairs.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOperating rooms generate 70% of hospital waste. Transitioning from disposable to reusable devices could mitigate surgical waste. Partially reusable, or hybrid, trocars can be used for minimally invasive surgery (MIS), but perceptions of increased infection risk may drive preferences toward disposable trocars. However, no data substantiates this risk. Our analysis of a national hernia outcomes database investigates this presumed association.
methodsUsing the abdominal core health quality collaborative (ACHQC), we identified high-volume inguinal hernia surgeons who used only disposable trocars for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (IHR) and hybrid trocars for robotic IHR. These two surgical approaches served as surrogates to evaluate differences between disposable and hybrid trocars. We performed a query of the ACHQC to identify patients who underwent elective MIS IHR with mesh between 2017 and 2023 by one of the previously identified surgeons.
resultsA total of 34,638 patients met inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching, there were 1191 patients in each group. There was no difference in rates of surgical site infection (SSI), surgical site occurrence requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI), readmission or reoperation between the two groups. There was a statistically significant higher rate of surgical site occurrence (SSO) in the disposable trocar group (5% vs. 2%, p = 0.003). This was driven by a significantly higher rate of hematomas (12% vs 38%, p = 0.007).
conclusionThis study did not find an increased risk of SSI associated with hybrid trocars compared to disposable trocars for MIS inguinal hernia repairs. To decrease surgical waste, surgeons should consider the use of hybrid trocars for laparoscopic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42836990What 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.