Skip to main content
Log in

Letter to the Editor on “Complications Following Robotic Hiatal Hernia Repair Are Higher Compared to Laparoscopy”

  • Letter to Editor
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Rosa D, Mohr C. Faulty analysis in study of robotic-assisted minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(4):371-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Leow JJ, Chang SL, Trinh QD. Accurately determining patients who underwent robot-assisted surgery: limitations of administrative databases. BJU Int. 2016;118(3):346-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cheufou DH, Mardanzai K, Ploenes T, Theegarten D, Stamatis G, Kampe S, et al. Effectiveness of Robotic Lobectomy-Outcome and Learning Curve in a High Volume Center. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;67(7):573-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Freire MP, Choi WW, Lei Y, Carvas F, Hu JC. Overcoming the learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Clin North Am. 2010;37(1):37-47, Table of Contents.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shyr BU, Chen SC, Shyr YM, Wang SE. Learning curves for robotic pancreatic surgery-from distal pancreatectomy to pancreaticoduodenectomy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(45):e13000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hu JC, Gold KF, Pashos CL, Mehta SS, Litwin MS. Role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(3):401-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Toomey PG, Teta AF, Patel KD, Ross SB, Rosemurgy AS. High-volume surgeons vs high-volume hospitals: are best outcomes more due to who or where? Am J Surg. 2016;211(1):59-63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Larusson HJ, Zingg U, Hahnloser D, Delport K, Seifert B, Oertli D. Predictive factors for morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: age, ASA score and operation type influence morbidity. World J Surg. 2009;33(5):980-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kao AM, Otero J, Schlosser KA, Marx JE, Prasad T, Colavita PD, et al. One More Time: Redo Paraesophageal Hernia Repair Results in Safe, Durable Outcomes Compared with Primary Repairs. Am Surg. 2018;84(7):1138-45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wennergren J, Levy S, Bower C, Miller M, Borman D, Davenport D, et al. Revisional paraesophageal hernia repair outcomes compare favorably to initial operations. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(9):3854-60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gerull WD, Cho D, Arefanian S, Kushner BS, Awad MM. Favorable peri-operative outcomes observed in paraesophageal hernia repair with robotic approach. Surg Endosc. 2021;35(6):3085-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gerull WD, Cho D, Kuo I, Arefanian S, Kushner BS, Awad MM. Robotic Approach to Paraesophageal Hernia Repair Results in Low Long-Term Recurrence Rate and Beneficial Patient-Centered Outcomes. J Am Coll Surg. 2020;231(5):520-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanuja Damani.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Damani, T., Awad, M. Letter to the Editor on “Complications Following Robotic Hiatal Hernia Repair Are Higher Compared to Laparoscopy”. J Gastrointest Surg 25, 3028–3029 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-05090-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-05090-2

Navigation