This multicentre blinded randomized trial compared robotic and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair in patients suitable for elective minimally invasive surgery. The study was designed to test whether the robotic platform would reduce hospital use and improve other patient-relevant outcomes. The trial found no evidence of a difference in the number of hospital days within 90 days between the two approaches. Secondary outcomes, including complications and other recovery measures, also did not show a clear early clinical advantage for robotic repair, although operative time and resource considerations remained important. For surgeons, the study reinforces a recurring message in robotic surgery: a technically sophisticated platform does not automatically translate into better outcomes for straightforward cases. Robotic surgery may still offer advantages in complex abdominal wall reconstruction, suturing and ergonomics, but those potential benefits need to be considered against operative time, cost and local expertise. The paper therefore supports selective, evidence-based use of robotics in ventral hernia surgery. Patient anatomy and procedure complexity should guide platform selection, while outcomes should be monitored locally rather than assumed from technological capability. For ASICON's robotic ventral hernia focus, this trial provides a useful foundation for discussing where robotics adds value and where conventional minimally invasive repair may remain entirely appropriate.