Robotic versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) approaches to bilateral hernia repair: a multicenter retrospective study using propensity score matching analysis

Usefulness of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair using the Endoscope Manipulator Robot (EMARO)

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair using an Endoscope Manipulator Robot (EMARO).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs. The transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP) has been used to treat inguinal hernias. The patients were divided into two groups: one group underwent laparoscopic surgery using EMARO (E-TAPP) and the other group underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery (L-TAPP). The EMARO is a pneumatically driven endoscope-holder robot. The surgical outcomes of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients underwent E-TAPP, and 36 underwent L-TAPP. The L-TAPP operation requires two personnel, whereas E-TAPP can be performed by one surgeon. The median operation times of the E-TAPP and L-TAPP groups were 81 min (range, 77-87) and 70 min (range, 60-94), respectively, and the median blood loss was 5 mL (range, 1-5) and 2 mL (range, 1-5). However, these differences were not statistically significant. The setup time for EMARO was approximately 8 min (range, 5-12). No patient experienced recurrence, and the postoperative complication rates were similar between the two groups. The number of patients who used postoperative analgesics in the E-TAPP and L-TAPP groups was four (n = 15) and 22 (n = 36), respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery using EMARO can reduce labor costs and postoperative pain. The surgical outcomes of the E-TAPP group were not inferior to those of the L-TAPP group, and E-TAPP could also be safely performed.

From Meshes to Minimally Invasive Techniques: A Comprehensive Review of Modern Hernia Repair Approaches

Hernias are a common medical condition characterized by the protrusion of organs or tissues through weakened muscle walls, affecting millions worldwide annually. Historically, from being treated with open surgeries using tension-free mesh repairs, the landscape of hernia repair has evolved significantly. This evolution has been marked by the advent and refinement of minimally invasive techniques, including laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches, which offer reduced postoperative pain, shorter recovery times, and improved patient outcomes compared to traditional methods. This comprehensive review aims to elucidate the evolution of hernia repair techniques, emphasizing the transition from conventional mesh repairs to advanced minimally invasive methodologies. By examining the historical progression and current state of hernia surgery, this review thoroughly analyzes the advancements in surgical techniques, materials, and technologies. Furthermore, it explores emerging trends such as biological meshes, ultrasound-guided procedures, and 3D printing applications in hernia repair. The clinical significance of these advancements lies in their potential to enhance the patient's quality of life, minimize complications, and optimize healthcare resource utilization. Insights gained from this review will inform clinicians and researchers about the efficacy, safety, and comparative effectiveness of various hernia repair approaches, guiding future directions in hernia management and fostering innovation in surgical practice.

Is previous radical prostatectomy a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair? A contemporary meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, radical prostatectomy (RP) has been considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. Purpose of this systematic review was to examine the current evidence and outcomes of minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair after RP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE data sets were consulted. Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP), robotic TAPP (r-TAPP), and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 4655 patients (16 studies) undergoing TAPP, r-TAPP, and TEP inguinal hernia repair after RP were included. The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 85 years. Open (49.1%), laparoscopic (7.4%), and robotic (43.5%) RP were described. Primary unilateral hernia repair was detailed in 96.3% of patients while 2.8% of patients were operated for recurrence. The pooled prevalence of intraoperative complication was 0.7% (95% CI 0.2-3.4%). Bladder injury and epigastric vessels bleeding were reported. The pooled prevalence of conversion to open was 0.8% (95% CI 0.3-1.7%). The estimated pooled prevalence of seroma, hematoma, and surgical site infection was 3.2% (95% CI 1.9-5.9%), 1.7% (95% CI 0.9-3.1%), and 0.3% (95% CI = 0.1-0.9%), respectively. The median follow-up was 18 months (range 8-48). The pooled prevalence of hernia recurrence and chronic pain were 1.1% (95% CI 0.1-3.1%) and 1.9% (95% CI 0.9-4.1%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair seems feasible, safe, and effective for the treatment of inguinal hernia after RP. Prostatectomy should not be necessarily considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair.

Meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair for inguinal hernia

BACKGROUND

Inguinal hernia is a common global disease. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal repair (RTAPP) and laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (LTAPP) for inguinal hernia.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search in Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed for relevant clinical studies. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, the quality of selected studies was assessed using the Jadad scale for randomized controlled studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of ten studies were included, comprising two randomized controlled studies and eight non-randomized controlled studies. Meta-analysis results revealed no statistically significant differences between the RTAPP group and the LTAPP group regarding hospital stay [MD = 0.21 days, 95% CI (-0.09, 0.51), P = 0.17], incidence of seroma [OR = 0.85, 95% CI(0.45, 1.59), P = 0.61], overall complication rate [OR = 1.22, 95% CI(0.68, 2.18), P = 0.51], readmission rate [OR = 1.31, 95% CI(0.23, 7.47), P = 0.76], and recurrence rate [OR = 0.82, 95% CI(0.22, 3.07), P = 0.77]. However, the RTAPP group had longer operation time compared to the LTAPP group [MD = 14.02 minutes, 95% CI (6.65, 21.39), P = 0.0002], and the cost of the RTAPP procedure was higher than that of the LTAPP procedure [MD = $4.17 thousand, 95% CI (2.59, 5.76), P<0.00001].

CONCLUSION

RTAPP for inguinal hernia is a safe and feasible approach, however, it is associated with increased operation time and treatment costs.

Abdominal Wall Hernias-State of the Art of Laparoscopic versus Robotic Surgery

Abdominal wall hernia repair, a common surgical procedure, includes various techniques to minimize postoperative complications and enhance outcomes. This review focuses on the comparison between laparoscopic and robotic approaches in treating inguinal and ventral hernias, presenting the ongoing situation of this topic. A systematic search identified relevant studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic approaches for inguinal and ventral hernias. Randomized control trials, retrospective, and prospective studies published after 1 January 2000, were included. Search terms such as hernia, inguinal, ventral, laparoscopy, robotic, and surgery were used. A total of 23 articles were included for analysis. Results indicated similar short-term outcomes for robotic and laparoscopic techniques in inguinal hernia repair, with robotic groups experiencing less postoperative pain. However, longer operative times and higher costs were associated with robotic repair. Robotic ventral hernia repair demonstrated potential benefits, including shorter hospital stay, lower recurrence and lower reoperation rates. While robotic surgery offers advantages such as shorter hospital stays, faster recovery, and less postoperative pain, challenges including costs and training requirements need consideration. The choice between laparoscopic and robotic approaches for abdominal wall hernias should be tailored based on individual surgeon expertise and resource availability, emphasizing a balanced evaluation of benefits and challenges.

Safety and short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal repair for inguinal hernia in pioneering hospitals in Japan: A nationwide retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to evaluate the safety and short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal repair for inguinal hernia in 12 pioneering hospitals in Japan.

METHODS

Clinical data of patients who underwent robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal repair between September 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021 were collected. Primary outcome measures were intra-operative adverse events and post-operative complications, whereas secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes, including chronic pain, recurrence, and learning curve.

RESULTS

In total, 307 patients were included. One case of inferior epigastric arterial injury was reported; no cases of bowel or bladder injury were reported. Thirty-five seromas were observed, including four (1.3%) cases that required aspiration. The median operative time of a unilateral case was 108 minutes (interquartile range: 89.8-125.5), and post-operative pain was rated 1 (interquartile range: 0-2) on the numerical rating scale. In complicated cases, such as recurrent inguinal hernias and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy-associated hernias, dissection and suture were safely achieved, and no complications were observed, except for non-symptomatic seroma. All patients underwent robotic procedures, and there was no chronic post-operative inguinal pain, although one case of hernia recurrence was reported. Regarding the learning curve, plateau performance was achieved after 7-10 cases in terms of operative time (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal repair can be safely introduced in Japan. Regardless of the involvement of many surgeons, the mastery of robotic techniques was achieved relatively quickly. The advantage of robotic technology such as wristed instruments may expand the application of minimally invasive hernia repair for complicated cases.

Comparison of short-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic transabdominal peritoneal repair for unilateral inguinal hernia: a propensity-score matched analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic transabdominal peritoneal repair (TAPP) for unilateral inguinal hernia.

METHODS

This single institutional retrospective cohort study used de-identified data of patients who underwent robotic TAPP (R-TAPP) or laparoscopic TAPP (L-TAPP) for unilateral inguinal hernia between January 1, 2016 and October 31, 2021. Two cohorts were propensity matched, and data were analyzed. The learning curve was evaluated in the R-TAPP group.

RESULTS

Among 938 patients analyzed, 704 were included. After propensity-score matching, 80 patients were included in each group. The difference in operative time between R-TAPP and L-TAPP groups was 10 min (99.5 and 89.5 min, p = 0.087); however, console/laparoscopic time was similar (67 and 66 min, p = 0.71). The dissection time for medial-type hernia in the R-TAPP group was marginally shorter than that in the L-TAPP group (17 and 27 min, p = 0.056); however, there was no difference for lateral-type hernia (38.5 and 40 min p = 0.37). Perioperative variables, including estimated blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative pain, had no significant difference, and chronic pain, which needed medication or intervention, was not observed in each group. The number of cases needed to achieve plateau performance was 7-10 in the R-TAPP group.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that R-TAPP was safely introduced, and its perioperative outcomes were not inferior to those of L-TAPP. A shorter dissection time for medial-type hernia might be due to the robot's advantages, and a fast-learning curve could help with the early standardization of the procedure.