Laparoscopic bilateral groin hernia repair with one large self-fixating mesh: prospective observational study with patient-reported outcome of urological symptoms and EuraHS-QoL scores

History of the Creation of Self-Gripping Mesh

Self-gripping mesh (ProgripTM, Sofradim Production, Trévoux, France) was introduced in 2006 as a synthetic prosthetic material for reinforcement of the abdominal wall in open inguinal hernia repair. As of September 2022, the self-gripping mesh has been implanted 4 million times. In June 2014 at the annual Mesh congress in Paris during an informal conversation with Dr. Chastan, Dr. Muysoms became intrigued by the history of the invention and creation of this self-gripping mesh. His fascination on this topic, was the initial bead implanted for this project to write down the history of the creation of self-gripping mesh.

Quality of life and surgical outcomes of robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair using a new hybrid mesh reinforcement

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to prospectively evaluate surgical and quality of life (QoL) outcomes of robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair (rRMVHR) using a new hybrid mesh in high-risk patients.

METHODS

Data was prospectively collected for patients classified as high-risk based on the modified ventral hernia working group (VHWG) grading system, who underwent rRMVHR using Synecor™ Pre hybrid mesh in a single center, between 2019 and 2020. Pre-, intra- and postoperative variables including hernia recurrence, surgical site events (SSE), hernia-specific quality of life (QoL), and financial costs were analyzed. QoL assessments were obtained from preoperative and postoperative patient visits. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to analyze the estimated recurrence-free time.

RESULTS

Fifty-two high-risk patients, with a mean (±SD) age of 58.6 ± 13.7 years and BMI of 36.9 ± 6.6 kg/m2, were followed for a mean (±SD) period of 22.4 ± 7.1 months. A total of 11 (21.2%) patients experienced postoperative complications, out of which eight were SSEs, including 7 (13.5%) seromas, 1 (1.9%) hematoma, and no infections. Procedural interventions were required for 2 (3.8%) surgical site occurrences. Recurrence was seen in 1 (1.9%) patient. The estimated mean (95% confidence interval) recurrence-free time was 33 (32.3-34.5) months. Postoperative QoL assessments demonstrated significant improvements in comparison to preoperative QoL, with a minimum ∆mean (±SD) of -15.5 ± 2.2 at one month (p < 0.001). The mean (±SD) procedure cost was $13,924.18 ± 7856.95 which includes the average mesh cost ($5390.12 ± 3817.03).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed favorable early and mid-term outcomes, in addition to significant improvements in QoL, after rRMVHR using Synecor™ hybrid mesh in high-risk patients.

Robotic versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to review the latest evidence on the robotic approach (RHR) for inguinal hernia repair comparing the pooled outcome of this technique with those of the standard laparoscopic procedure (LHR). A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus for studies published between 2010 and 2021 concerning the comparison between RHR versus LHR. After screening 582 articles, 9 articles with a total of 64,426 patients (7589 RHRs) were eligible for inclusion. Among preoperative variables, a pooled higher ratio of ASA > 2 patients was found in the robotic group (12.4 vs 8.6%, p < 0.001). Unilateral hernia repair was more common in the laparoscopic group (79.9 vs 68.1, p < 0.001). Overall, operative time was longer in the robotic group (160 vs 90 min, p < 0.001); this was confirmed also in the sub-analysis on unilateral procedures (88 vs 68 min, p = 0.040). The operative time for robotic bilateral repair was similar to the laparoscopic one (111 vs 100, p = 0.797). Conversion to open surgery was 0% in the robotic group. The pooled rate of chronic pain and postoperative complications was similar between the groups. The standardized mean difference MD of the costs between LHR versus RHR was − 3270$ (95% CI – 4757 to − 1782, p < 0.001). In conclusion, laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repair have similar safety parameters and postoperative outcomes. Robotic approach may require longer operative time if the unilateral repair is performed. Costs are higher in the robotic group.