ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robotic versus open mesh-enforced retrorectus ventral hernia repair: a multi-center comparative study.
Article in Journal of robotic 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mesh-enforced open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) is associated with increased surgical site occurrences and prolonged hospital stay. Robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (RVHR) may offer benefits compared to OVHR, but comparative literature is scarce. This multicenter prospective cohort study used data from the international CROSSFIRE (MultiCentre InteRnational PrOSpective DatabaSe For Ventral HernIa REpair) register. Patients undergoing OVHR or RVHR for ventral hernias with 3-15 cm transverse diameter between December 2023 and March 2026 were analyzed. The primary outcome was surgical revision after 30 days. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain after 2 days and 6 weeks, operative time, length of stay (LOS), readmissions and follow-up at 1 year. Two hundred thirty patients were included and analyzed, of which 77 (41% female, BMI 28.4 kg/m2, 90.7% incisional hernias, median hernia diameter 4 cm) underwent OVHR, and 153 (33.7% female, BMI 29.4 kg/m2, 91.7% incisional hernias, median hernia diameter 5 cm) underwent RVHR. Surgical revisions were more frequent after OVHR compared to RVHR (13.7% vs. 4.8%; p = 0.027). Median LOS was longer after OVHR (4 days vs. 3days; p < 0.001). Median operation time was shorter in OVHR (100 min vs. 210 min; p < 0.001). The pain after two days was lower after OVHR (VAS 2 vs. 3; p = 0.002); however, it was higher after 6 weeks (2 vs. 1 VAS; p = 0.008). After one year, the clinical recurrence rate was higher after OVHR 7.1% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.010). RVHR was associated with fewer surgical revisions after 30 days, a shorter LOS, less pain after 6 weeks and improved outcomes after one year. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.