Patient perceptions of acute pain and activity disruption following inguinal hernia repair: a propensity-matched comparison of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open approaches

Experiences of Patients Undergoing Robot-assisted Cardiac Surgery: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Over the last two decades, the use of robotic surgery in cardiac procedures has become increasingly prevalent. Typically, assessments of patient outcomes for robot-assisted surgery concentrate on patient morbidity and mortality, surgical complications, and length of hospital stay. However, there is limited research on patients' perceptions of robot-assisted surgery. Therefore, this study aims to determine the experiences of patients undergoing robot-assisted cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

The study used a qualitative design.

METHODS

The study was conducted with 12 patients who underwent robot-assisted heart surgery at an educational and research hospital. Ethical approval and written informed consent were obtained before the study.

FINDINGS

66.7% of the participants were male with an average age of 38.25 ± 16.06 years. The analysis of qualitative data identified three themes: Robotic surgery, Post-Surgical Experience, and Homecoming.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients expressed satisfaction with robotic surgery and recommended it to others undergoing surgery. Based on the findings, we may suggest that nurses may conduct personalized education programs about robotic surgery and develop programs to follow up with patients at home.

Laparoscopic versus robotic TAPP/TEP inguinal hernia repair: a multicenter, propensity score weighted study

PURPOSE

The objective of this retrospective study was to assess safety and comparative clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) and robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair (RIHR) from multi-institutional experience in Taiwan.

METHODS

Medical records from a total of eight hospitals were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Patients primarily diagnosed of inguinal hernia, recurrent inguinal hernia or incarceration groin hernia patients who either underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair between January 2018 and December 2022 were included in the study. Baseline characteristics, intra-operative and post-operative results were analyzed. To compare two cohorts, overlap weighting was employed to balance the significant inter-group differences. We also conducted subgroup analyses by state of a hernia (primary or recurrent/incarceration) and laterality (unilateral or bilateral) that indicated complexity of surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 1,080 patients who underwent minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair from 8 hospitals across Taiwan were collected. Following the application of inclusion criteria, there were 279 patients received RIHR and 763 patients received LIHR. In the baseline analysis, RIHR was more often performed in recurrent/incarceration (RIHR 18.6% vs LIHR 10.3%, p = 0.001) and bilateral cases (RIHR 81.4 vs LIHR 58.3, p < 0.001). Suturing was dominant mesh fixation method in RIHR (RIHR 81% vs LIHR 35.8%, p < 0.001). More overweight patients were treated with RIHR (RIHR 58.8% vs LIHR 48.9%, p = 0.006). After overlap weighting, there were no significant difference in intraoperative and post-operative complications between RIHR and LIHR. Reoperation and prescription rates of pain medication (opioid) were significantly lower in RIHR than LIHR in overall group comparison (reoperation: RIHR 0% vs. LIHR 2.9%, p = 0.016) (Opioid prescription: RIHR 3.34 mg vs LIHR 10.82 mg, p = 0.001) while operation time was significantly longer in RIHR (OR time: RIHR 155.27 min vs LIHR 95.30 min, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world experience suggested that RIHR is a safe, and feasible option with comparable intra-operative and post-operative outcomes to LHIR. In our study, RIHR showed technical advantages in more complicated hernia cases with yielding to lower reoperation rates, and less opioid use.

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.

Risk factors predicting acute postoperative pain immediately after minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair

Introduction

Acute postoperative pain remains one of the most common problems, even after laparoscopic or endoscopic hernia repair. Avoiding predictive factors for acute pain after surgery or prescribing additional analgesia for a patient who has risk factors that cannot be removed can be one of the options to reduce acute postoperative pain. However, there is a lack of clinical studies that evaluate the predictive factors of postoperative pain after transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) surgeries.

Aim

To identify independent risk factors predicting pain after laparoscopic and endoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

Material and methods

A prospective, randomized clinical trial was carried out by randomising patients into 2 groups (TAPP and TEP). Pre-operative and peri-operative findings were recorded. Postoperative pain was evaluated 3 h after the surgery using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Groups of patients who felt mild pain (VAS 0-2) and patients who felt average or severe pain (VAS 3-10) were compared.

Results

A total of 132 male patients were included in the study. Disease duration of more than 1 year, smoking, and TAPP surgery significantly increase the risk of moderate and strong pain 3 h after surgery. Conversely, shorter duration of symptoms and physical occupation decrease the risk of acute pain score greater than 3 according to the VAS.

Conclusions

The study shows that the duration since groin hernia appearance, smoking, physical occupation, and TAPP technique are possible predictive factors for acute postoperative pain after minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. We suggest that for patients who have those predictors, some factors can be avoided or additional analgesia can be used.

Postoperative compression in preventing early complications after groin hernia repair

PURPOSE

We conducted this study to investigate the efficacy, safety, and clinical value of postoperative compression in preventing seroma formation, relieving acute pain, and improving QoL after groin hernia repair.

METHODS

This multi-center, prospective, observational real-world study was conducted from March 1, 2022, to August 31, 2022. The study was completed in 53 hospitals in 25 provinces in China. A total of 497 patients who underwent groin hernia repair were enrolled. All patients used a compression device to compress the operative region after surgery. The primary outcome was seroma incidence 1 month after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative acute pain and QoL.

RESULTS

A total of 497 patients [median (IQR) age 55 (41-67) years, 456 (91.8%) male] were enrolled, of whom 454 underwent laparoscopic groin hernia repair and 43 open hernia repair. The follow-up rate was 98.4% 1 month after surgery. Seroma incidence was 7.2% (35 of 489 patients) overall, lower than reported by previous research. No significant differences were found between the two groups (P > 0.05). VAS scores after compression were significantly lower than before compression overall and in both groups (P < 0.001). The laparoscopic group showed a high level of QoL compared with the open group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). CCS score correlated positively with VAS score.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative compression, to a certain extent, can reduce seroma incidence, relieve postoperative acute pain, and improve QoL after groin hernia repair. Further large-scale randomized controlled studies are warranted to determine long-term outcomes.

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

BACKGROUND

Since the introduction of minimally invasive surgery, new techniques like transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair have progressively gained acceptance for the treatment of groin hernia. Laparoscopic TAPP (LTAPP) is recommended for bilateral repairs. Likewise, the introduction of robotic platforms has promised additional surgical benefits for robotic TAPP (RTAPP), which are yet to be confirmed. This study compared multicenter data obtained from patients undergoing bilateral inguinal hernia repair with RTAPP, performed during the preliminary learning curve period, versus conventional LTAPP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All consecutive bilateral inguinal hernia patients from four Italian centers between June 2015 and July 2020 were selected. A propensity score model was used to compare patients treated with LTAPP versus RTAPP, considering sex, age, body mass index, current smoking status, overall comorbidity, hernia classification (primary or recurrent), and associated procedures as covariates. After matching, intraoperative details and postoperative outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 275 LTAPP and 40 RTAPP were performed. After matching, 80 and 40 patients were allocated to the LTAPP and RTAPP cohorts, respectively. No intraoperative complications or conversion to open surgery occurred. However, a longer operative time was recorded in the RTAPP group (79 ± 21 versus 98 ± 29 min; p < 0.001). Postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (p = 0.13) did not differ and complication rates were similar. There were no clinical recurrences in either group, with mean follow-up periods of 52 ± 14 (LTAPP) and 35 ± 8 (RTAPP) months. A statistical difference in length of hospital stay was found between the groups (1.05 ± 0.22 vs 1.50 ± 0.74 days; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this patient population, outcomes for bilateral inguinal hernia repair appear comparable for RTAPP and LTAPP, except for a shorter recovery after laparoscopic surgery. A longer operative time for robotic surgery could be attributable to the learning curve period of each center.

What is the Best Inguinal Hernia Repair?

As the management of inguinal hernias have evolved over hundreds of years, so too has our paradigm of what constitutes the "best repair." To best answer what the ideal inguinal hernia repair is, the authors take an in-depth look at considerations to the patient, the provider, and the health care system.

Robot-assisted groin hernia repair is primarily performed by specialized surgeons: a scoping review

Surgical residents routinely participate in open and laparoscopic groin hernia repairs. The increasing popularity of robot-assisted groin hernia repair could lead to an educational loss for residents. We aimed to explore the involvement of surgical specialists and surgical residents, i.e., non-specialists, in robot-assisted groin hernia repair. The scoping review was reported according to PRISMA-ScR guideline. A protocol was uploaded at Open Science Framework, and a systematic search was conducted in four databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Included studies had to report on robot-assisted groin hernia repairs. Data charting was conducted in duplicate. Of the 67 included studies, 85% of the studies described that the robot-assisted groin hernia repair was performed by a surgical specialist. The rest of the studies had no description of the primary operating surgeon. Only 13% of the included studies reported that a resident attended the robot-assisted groin hernia repair. Thus, robot-assisted groin hernia repair was mainly performed by surgical specialists, and robot-assisted groin hernia repair therefore seems to be underutilized to educate surgical residents.

Clinical Data Analysis for Treatment of Adult Inguinal Hernia by TAPP or TEP

Background

Transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair are the primary surgical methods for the treatment of adult inguinal hernia, but it remains necessary to consider which one to choose in clinical practice. Our study seeks to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic TAPP and laparoscopic TEP in the treatment of adult inguinal hernia and to explore which surgical method is a better choice.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 686 adult patients with inguinal hernia admitted to our hospital from the period January 2016 to December 2020 was conducted. According to different surgical methods, they were divided into two groups: a TAPP group (n = 361) and a TEP group (n = 325). These two groups of patients were statistically analyzed, and the operation time, postoperative pain, postoperative hospital stay length, postoperative complications, and recurrence rate were compared between them.

Results

There were no significant differences in postoperative hospital stay, complications, and the recurrence rate between the two groups (p > 0.05). The duration of operation in the TEP group was significantly shorter than that in the TAPP group, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001); in terms of postoperative pain, the TEP group fared better than the TAPP group, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

TAPP and TEP are safe and effective surgical methods in the treatment of adult inguinal hernia. However, compared with TAPP, TEP can significantly shorten the operative time, reduce intraoperative trauma, and limit postoperative pain in the treatment of adult inguinal hernia. Furthermore, it does not increase the rate of complications or recurrence, so it is worth popularizing.

A comparative evaluation of robotic and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a critical evaluation on the impact of postoperative pain and opioid requirements

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of minimally invasive surgery using laparoscopy on postoperative pain and opioid use are well established. Our goal was to determine whether patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass using a robotic approach (RA-RYGB) had lower postoperative pain and required less opioids than those undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (L-RYGB). Secondary outcomes evaluated included length of stay, operative time, and readmissions.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

This was a retrospective cohort study from a tertiary academic medical center. Patients who underwent L-RYGB or RA-RYGB between 5/1/2018 and 10/31/2019 were included. Cases with concomitant hernia repair, chronic opioid use, and those who did not receive a TAP block or multimodal pain control were excluded. Baseline demographics were compared. Inpatient and outpatient opioid use in Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MME) and pain scores (10-point Likert scale) were compared.

RESULTS

There were 573 RY patients included (462 L-RYGB; 111 RA-RYGB). Median and maximum inpatient pain scores were similar for L-RYGB and RA-RYGB (3.0 vs 3.1, p = 0.878; 7.0 vs 7.0, p = 0.688). Median inpatient opioid use and maximum single day use were similar for L-RYGB and RA-RYGB (40.0 MME vs. 42.0 MME, p = 0.671; 30.0 MME vs 30.0 MME, p = 0.648). Both the outpatient prescribing of opioids (50.2% vs. 42.3%, p = 0.136) and outpatient opioid MME at 2 weeks (L-RYGB 30.0 MME vs. 33.8 MME, p = 0.854) were comparable between cohorts. Patient reported pain at 2-week follow-up was significantly higher for RA-RYGB (68.1%) than L-RYGB (55.6%) (p = 0.030). RA-RYGB had a higher rate of 30-day readmission and longer operative times compared to the L-RYGB (6.3% vs 13.5%, p = 0.010; 144.5 vs 200.0 min, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study identified no benefit for postoperative pain or opioid requirements in patients undergoing RA-RYGB compared to L-RYGB. The RA-RYGB group was significantly more likely to report pain at the two-week follow-up.

Spin is present in the majority of articles evaluating robot-assisted groin hernia repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The number of scientific articles published each year is increasing, resulting in greater competition to get work published. Spin is defined as specific reporting strategies used to distort the readers' interpretation of results so that they are viewed more favorable. However, prevalence of spin in studies comparing robot-assisted groin hernia repair with traditional methods is unknown.

OBJECTIVES/AIM

To determine the frequency and extent of spin in studies assessing robot-assisted groin hernia repair.

METHODS

This systematic review was reported according to PRISMA guidelines, and a protocol was registered at PROSPERO before data extraction. Database search included PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central.

RESULTS

Of 35 included studies, spin was present in 57%. Within these, 95% had spin present in the abstract and 80% in the conclusion of the article. There was no association between study size and spin (p > 0.05). However, presence of spin in studies positively minded towards robot-assisted hernia repair was higher (p < 0.001) compared with those against or being neutral in their view of the procedure. Furthermore, being funded by or receiving grants from Intuitive Surgical were associated with a higher prevalence of spin (p < 0.05) compared with those who were not.

CONCLUSION

Spin was found to be common in articles reporting on robot-assisted groin hernia repair, and presence of spin was higher in studies funded by or receiving grants from the robot company. This suggests that readers should be cautious when reading similar literature.

Current status and future perspectives of robotic inguinal hernia repair

With more than 5500 da Vinci Surgical System (DVSS) installed worldwide, the robotic approach for general surgery, including for inguinal hernia repair, is gaining popularity in the USA. However, in many countries outside the USA, robotic surgery is performed at only a few advanced institutions; therefore, its advantages over the open or laparoscopic approaches for inguinal hernia repair are unclear. Several retrospective studies have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of robotic inguinal hernia repair, but there is still no firm evidence to support the superiority of robotic surgery for this procedure or its long-term clinical outcomes. Robotic surgery has the potential to overcome the disadvantages of conventional laparoscopic surgery through appropriate utilization of technological advantages, such as wristed instruments, tremor filtering, and high-resolution 3D images. The potential benefits of robotic inguinal hernia repair are lower rates of complications or recurrence than open and laparoscopic surgery, with less postoperative pain, and a rapid learning curve for surgeons. In this review, we summarize the current status and future prospects of robotic inguinal hernia repair and discuss the issues associated with this procedure.

Does adoption of new technology increase surgical volume? The robotic inguinal hernia repair model

Robotic Inguinal Hernia repair has been associated with higher costs but shorter length of stay. Robotic surgery is an appealing option for patients undergoing elective hernia surgery however given the high startup, maintenance and operating costs, the adoption of robotic technology may not guarantee increased profitability. Our hypothesis is that the introduction of robotic technology increases the overall surgical volume of inguinal hernia repairs within a hospital as compared to non-robotic hospitals. The 2010-2018 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration Ambulatory Patient data were queried for Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic inguinal hernia repairs using ICD9, ICD10 and CPT codes. Using a difference in difference (DID) technique, we determined the difference of the total hernia volume of robotic hospitals pre- and post-adoption of robotic technology. In addition, selected hospitals which were early adopters of robotic technology were compared to with their surrounding non-robotic competitor hospitals. Incident Rate Ratios-IRR, from the difference in difference analysis determined the significance of robotic technology. Hospital and patient demographic data were evaluated, and chi square test were used to determine statistical significance. p < 0.05 was considered significant. There were a total of 258,785 inguinal hernia repairs (5774 Robotic, 88,265 Laparoscopic and 164,746 Open) performed at 398 hospitals, 94 of which had robotic capabilities. Of all the procedure types, around 90% were primary inguinal hernia repairs. The majority of patients in this cohort were white non-Hispanic or Latino males (85%, 84%, 92%), age group 51-70 (46%), holding commercial health insurance (43%) and belonged to the lowest Charlson comorbidity index level (82%). Facility types designation for almost all robotic hospitals was hospital (99%), whereas 65% of non-robotic hospitals were ambulatory surgery centers and all other hospitals. Robotic hospitals experienced a 9.5% increase in total volume of inguinal hernia repairs after introduction of robotic technology (Incident Rate Ratios-IRR 1.095, p value < 0.0001). A significant increase in total hernia volume was observed for the early adopter hospitals with the IRR(s) ranging 1.20-2.51 (all p values < 0.0001), implying that adoption of robotic technology can in fact lead to very significant increase in total hernia volume for a hospital. The introduction of robotic technology leads to an increase in the overall volume of inguinal hernia repairs performed at a given hospital. To further evaluate the impact of robotic technology and significance of this methodology, additional work is underway using additional procedures and data from other states.

Comparison between robotic and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in Caucasian patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Laparoscopic and robotic techniques allow surgeons to dissect and observe the groin area from the inside out, this study was to evaluate and compare the effects and safety of robotic inguinal hernia repair (R-IHR) and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (L-IHR) in Caucasian patients.

Methods

We searched the full texts of studies comparing R-IHR and L-IHR in multiple databases. Meta-, sensitivity, and bias analyses of the included literature were performed with Review Manager 5.2, and forest plots were drawn. The joint estimate of the risk ratio (RR) and the mean difference (MD) of the 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as a measure of the effect size.

Results

This meta-analysis included 8 eligible studies involving 1,379 Caucasian patients with inguinal hernia (IH). No significant difference was found in pain score (MD =1.52, 95% CI, −0.30, 3.35, P=0.10; I²=97%), length of hospital stay (MD =0.14, 95% CI, −0.03, 0.30, P for overall effect =1.63, I²=0%), or complications (RR =1.24 with 95% CI, 0.94, 1.63, P for overall effect =0.13, I²=0%) between R-IHR and L-IHR. However, there was significant difference in operative time between R-IHR and L-IHR (MD =17.17, 95% CI, 6.32, 28.03, P=0.002; I²=84%).

Discussion

This meta-analysis revealed only minor differences between R-IHR and L-IHR in terms of clinical effects and safety in Caucasian patients, although R-IHR has a longer operative time than L-IHR. Both R-IHR and L-IHR are suitable to treat Caucasian patients with IH.

Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair Outcomes: Operative Time and Cost Analysis

Background

Robotic inguinal hernia repair is the latest iteration of minimally invasive herniorrhaphy. Previous studies have shown expedited learning curves compared to traditional laparoscopy, which may be offset by higher cost and longer operative time. We sought to compare operative time and direct cost across the evolving surgical practice of 10 surgeons in our healthcare system.

Methods

This is a retrospective review of all transabdominal preperitoneal robotic inguinal hernia repairs performed by 10 general surgeons from July 2015 to September 2018. Patients requiring conversion to an open procedure or undergoing simultaneous procedures were excluded. The data was divided to compare each surgeon's initial 20 cases to their subsequent cases. Direct operative cost was calculated based on the sum of supplies used intra-operatively. Multivariate analysis, using a generalized estimating equation, was adjusted for laterality and resident involvement to evaluate outcomes.

Results

Robotic inguinal hernia repairs were divided into two groups: early experience (n = 167) and late experience (n = 262). The late experience had a shorter mean operative time by 17.6 min (confidence interval: 4.06 - 31.13, p = 0.011), a lower mean direct operative cost by $538.17 (confidence interval: 307.14 - 769.20, p < 0.0001), and fewer postoperative complications (p = 0.030) on multivariate analysis. Thirty-day readmission rates were similar between both groups.

Conclusion

Increasing surgeon experience with robotic inguinal hernia repair is associated with a predictable reduction in operative time, complication rates, and direct operative cost per case. Thirty-day readmission rates are not affected by the learning curve.

Operating costs, fiscal impact, value analysis and guidance for the routine use of robotic technology in abdominal surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to define the value, cost, and fiscal impact of robotic-assisted procedures in abdominal surgery and provide clinical guidance for its routine use.

METHODS

34,984 patients who underwent an elective cholecystectomy, colectomy, inguinal hernia repair, hysterectomy, or appendectomy over a 24-month period were analyzed by age, BMI, risk class, operating time, LOS and readmission rate. Average Direct and Total Cost per Case (ADC, TCC) and Net Margin per Case (NM) were produced for each surgical technique, i.e., open, laparoscopic, and robotic assisted (RA).

RESULTS

All techniques were shown to have similar clinical outcomes. 9412 inguinal herniorrhaphy were performed (48% open with $2138 ADC, 29% laparoscopy with $3468 ADC, 23% RA with $6880 ADC); 8316 cholecystectomies (94% laparoscopy with $2846 ADC, 4.4% RA with a $7139 ADC, 16% open with a $3931 ADC); 3432 colectomies (42% open with a $12,849 ADC, 38% laparoscopy with a $10,714, 20% RA with a $15,133); 12,614 hysterectomies [42% RA with a $8213 Outpatient (OP) ADC, 39% laparoscopy $5181 OP ADC, 19% open $4894 OP ADC]. Average Global NM is - 1% for RA procedures and only positive with commercial payors.

CONCLUSION

RA techniques do not produce significant clinical enhancements than similar surgical techniques with identical outcomes while their costs are much higher. The produced value analysis does not support the routine use of RA techniques for inguinal hernia repair and cholecystectomy. RA techniques for hysterectomies and colectomies are also performed at much higher cost than open and laparoscopic techniques, should only be routinely used with appropriate clinical justification and by cost efficient surgical providers.

Comparative perioperative and 5-year outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic or open inguinal hernia repair: a study of 153,727 patients in the state of New York

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the perioperative outcomes of robotic inguinal hernia repair as compared to the open and laparoscopic approaches utilizing large-scale population-level data.

METHODS

This study was funded by the SAGES Robotic Surgery Research Grant (2019). The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative database was used to identify all adult patients undergoing initial open (O-IHR), laparoscopic (L-IHR), and robotic (R-IHR) inguinal hernia repair between 2010 and 2016. Perioperative outcome measures [complications, length of stay (LOS), 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, 30-day readmissions] and estimated 1/3/5-year recurrence incidences were compared. Propensity score (PS) analysis was used to estimate marginal differences between R-IHR and L-IHR or O-IHR, using a 1:1 matching algorithm.

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 153,727 patients underwent inguinal hernia repair (117,603 [76.5%] O-IHR, 35,565 [23.1%] L-IHR; 559 [0.36%] R-IHR) in New York state. Initial univariate analysis found R-IHR to have longer LOS (1.74 days vs. 0.66 O-IHR vs 0.19 L-IHR) and higher rates of overall complications (9.3% vs. 3.6% O-IHR vs 1.1% L-IHR), 30-day ED visits (11.6% vs. 6.1% O-IHR vs. 4.9% L-IHR), and 30-day readmissions (5.6% vs. 2.4% O-IHR vs. 1.2% L-IHR) (p < 0.0001). R-IHR was associated with higher recurrence compared to L-IHR. Following PS analysis, there were no differences in perioperative outcomes between R-IHR and L-IHR, and the difference in recurrence was found to be sensitive to possible unobserved confounding factors. R-IHR had significantly lower risk of complications (Risk difference - 0.09, 95% CI [- 0.13, - 0.056]; p < 0.0001) and shorter LOS (Ratio 0.53, 95% CI [0.45, 0.62]; p < 0.0001) compared to O-IHR.

CONCLUSION

In adult patients, R-IHR may be associated with comparable to more favorable 30-day perioperative outcomes as compared with L-IHR and O-IHR, respectively.

Multiple perceptions of robotic-assisted surgery among surgeons and patients: a cross-sectional study

Limited data exist regarding knowledge and perceptions of surgeons and patients about robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in the Middle East. This study aimed to explore perceptions of surgeons and patients about RAS. A questionnaire-based survey was distributed among surgeons of different specialties and patients. Between March and September 2019, 278 and 256 surveys were completed by surgeons and patients, respectively (95.2% and 94.8% response rate, respectively). The surgeons' self-reported experience with technology was related to the level of comfort with computers and computer literacy. Most surgeons have heard of RAS availability, and the majority agreed to its introduction into the healthcare system. However, only 75 (27%) of the surgeons thought that the surgeon has complete control over the robot, and 69 (25%) surgeons were not sure of the level of control the surgeon has over the robot reflecting poor knowledge about this technology. Less than a third of patient respondents have heard of RAS. However, half of them would consider it should they need to undergo surgery. When compared to open surgery, 23 (9%), 26 (10%), and 94 (37%) patient respondents thought that RAS caused less pain, had fewer complications, and was faster than conventional surgery, respectively. Knowledge and perceptions about RAS are limited among surgeons and patients in Kuwait. Efforts should focus on increasing awareness.

Prospective, multicenter, pairwise analysis of robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair with open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: early results from the Prospective Hernia Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare peri-operative outcomes through 30 days, including pain and quality of life (QOL) through 3 months across three cohorts of inguinal hernia repair (IHR) patients (robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open IHR).

METHODS

The Prospective Hernia Study is an ongoing, multicenter, comparative, open-label analysis of clinical and patient-reported outcomes from robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) versus open and RAS versus laparoscopic IHR procedures. Patient responses to the Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS) questionnaire provided QOL outcomes.

RESULTS

504 enrolled patients underwent unilateral or bilateral IHR (RAS, n = 159; open, n = 190; laparoscopic, n = 155) at 17 medical institutions from May 2016 through December 2018. Propensity score matching provided a balanced comparison: RAS versus open (n = 112 each) and RAS versus laparoscopic (n = 80 each). Overall, operative times were significantly different between the RAS and laparoscopic cases (83 vs. 65 min; p < 0.001). Fewer RAS patients required prescription pain medication than either open (49.5% vs. 80.0%; p < 0.001) or laparoscopic patients (45.3% vs. 65.4%; p = 0.013). Median number of prescription pain pills taken differed for RAS vs. open (0.5 vs. 15.5; p = 0.001) and were comparable for RAS vs laparoscopic (7.0 vs. 6.0; p = 0.482) among patients taking prescribed pain medication. Time to return to normal activities differed for RAS vs. open (3 vs. 4 days; p = 0.005) and were comparable for RAS vs. laparoscopic (4 vs. 4 days; p = 0.657). Median CCS scores through 3 months were comparable for the three approaches. Postoperative complication rates for the three groups also were comparable. One laparoscopic case was converted to open.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that IHR can be performed effectively with the robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, or open approaches. There was no difference in the median number of prescription pain medication pills taken between the RAS and laparoscopic groups. A difference was observed in the overall number of patients reporting the need to take prescription pain medication. Comparable operative times were observed for RAS unilateral IHR patients compared to open unilateral IHR patients; however, operative times for RAS overall and bilateral subjects were longer than for open patients. Operative times were longer overall for RAS patients compared to laparoscopic patients; however, there was no difference in conversion and complication rate in the RAS vs. laparoscopic groups or the complication rate in the RAS vs. open group. Time to return to normal activities for RAS IHR patients was comparable to that of laparoscopically repaired patients and significantly sooner compared to open IHR patients.

Design of a comparative outcome analysis of open, laparoscopic, or robotic-assisted incisional or inguinal hernia repair utilizing surgeon experience and a novel follow-up model

BACKGROUND

In a recent publication, the International Guidelines for Groin Hernia Management by the European Hernia Society (EHS) recognized the need to individualize and tailor the surgical approach for hernia repair. There may be different opportunities for optimization of the surgical technique for surgeons performing open, laparoscopic, or robotic-assisted hernia repair. Robotic-assisted hernia repair is a relatively new minimally invasive surgical approach compared to laparoscopic and open repair. Currently, there is a lack of comparative prospective studies designed to evaluate long-term outcomes of patients undergoing robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, or open hernia repair.

MATERIALS & METHODS

This manuscript presents an innovative study design with two study cohorts (incisional and inguinal hernia repair) that contain three arms (robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open). The trial objective is to collect short-term and long-term outcomes for patients undergoing robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, or open hernia repair. The present publication will discuss the trial design, methods used to ensure consistency in surgeon expertise, and provides strategies to obtain long-term (> 3 months) follow-up data for enrolled patients.

RESULTS

One hundred subjects underwent incisional and one hundred underwent inguinal hernia repair at the time of this manuscript. Surgeon experience was analyzed across the three surgical techniques and follow-up compliance was assessed through 1 year. The follow-up completion rates for both study cohorts were >80% for all visits.

CONCLUSIONS

The innovative trial design helped to improve the quality and quantity of long-term follow-up. More innovative options to improve patient retention may be tested in future trials of similar design.

Laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal groin hernia repair with self-gripping polyester mesh: a series of 780 repairs

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic groin hernia repair is an increasingly common procedure with benefits of reduced post-operative pain and infection. Post-operative chronic pain remains an ongoing concern in about 10% of patients. Parietex ProGrip™, a polyester self-gripping mesh, has a theoretical benefit of avoiding tacks for mesh-fixation. This case series reflects our long-term experience of this technique.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective case series from November 2011 to December 2017. Patients were identified through an operative Medicare Benefits Schedule item number search. Clinical documentation was reviewed with length of stay, mesh infection, chronic pain, recurrence and re-operation as primary data points.

RESULTS

A total of 514 patients underwent 780 laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs with self-gripping polyester mesh during this period. There were 53 female (10.3%) and 461 male patients (89.7%). Unilateral hernia repair was performed in 248 patients (48.2%) and bilateral repair in 266 patients (51.8%). Almost all repairs (779, 99.8%) were primary hernias. There were no mesh infections. Four recurrences were noted (0.51%) and three of these subsequently underwent open redo-hernia repairs (0.38%). Post-operative follow-up was up to 4.4 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Our series of laparoscopic groin hernia repair with self-gripping mesh demonstrate this is a safe and reliable mesh and effective technique with low recurrence rates.

Robotic inguinal hernia repair: is technology taking over? Systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To examine the current evidence on the therapeutic role and outcomes of robotic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal hernia repair (rTAPP) to better define its risk-benefit ratio and guide clinical decision-making.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were consulted. A Frequentist single-arm study-level random effect meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Twelve studies published between 2015 and 2018 met the inclusion criteria (1645 patients). Patients' age ranged from 16 to 96, the BMI ranged from 19 to 35.6 kg/m², and 86.1% were males. Unilateral hernia repair was performed in 69.6% while bilateral hernia repair was performed in 30.4% of patients. The operations were all conducted using the da Vinci Xi or Si robotic system (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). The rTAPP was successfully completed in 99.4% of patients and the operative time ranged from 45 to 180.4 min. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 16 to 368 days. The estimated pooled prevalence of intraoperative complications and conversion were 0.03% (95% CI 0.00-0.3) and 0.14% (95% CI 0.0-0.5%), respectively. The estimated pooled prevalence of urinary retention, seroma/hematoma, and overall complications were 3.5% (95% CI 1.6-5.8%), 4.1% (95% CI 1.6-7.5%), and 7.4% (95% CI 3.4-10.9%). The estimated pooled prevalence of hernia recurrence was 0.18% (95% CI 0.00-0.84%).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic technology has been progressively entering surgical thinking and gradually changing surgical procedures. Based on the results of the present study, the rTAPP seems feasible, safe, and effective in the short term for patients with unilateral and bilateral inguinal hernias. Further prospective studies and randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.

Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair: Outcomes and Predictors of Complications

BACKGROUND

The robotic approach to an inguinal hernia has not been compared head to head with the open and laparoscopic techniques in randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, long-term outcomes for robotic inguinal hernia repair (RHR) are lacking. In this study, we compared laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LHR) and RHR with open inguinal hernia repair (OHR) in veteran patients performed by surgeons most familiar with each approach.

METHODS

A retrospective single-institution analysis of 1299 inguinal hernia repairs performed at the VA North Texas Health Care System between 2005 and 2017 was undertaken. Three surgeons performed the operations, each an expert in one approach, and there was no crossover in techniques. A total of 1100 OHRs, 128 LHRs, and 71 RHRs were performed. Univariable analysis was undertaken to determine associations between techniques and outcomes (OHR versus LHR; OHR versus RHR; LHR versus RHR). Setting complications as a dependent variable, multivariable analyses were undertaken to determine an association with complications as well as independent predictors of complications.

RESULTS

Patient demographics were similar among groups except for age that was higher in the OHR cohort. The average follow-up was 5.2 ± 3.4 y. In the present report, recurrence was associated with a higher rate in the RHR versus OHR (5.6% versus 1.7%; P < 0.02), but not in the LHR versus OHR (3.9% versus 1.9%; P = 0.09). Inguinodynia was more likely to occur in both the LHR and RHR compared with the OHR (9.4% and 14.1 versus 1.5%; both P's < 0.001). Urinary retention was also more common in the LHR and RHR than in the OHR (5.5% and 5.6% versus 1.8%, both P's < 0.05) as was the rate of overall complications (34.4% and 38.0% versus 11.2%, both P's < 0.001). Multivariable regression analysis showed femoral hernias, ASA, serum albumin, operative room time, a recurrent hernia, and the minimally invasive approaches were independent predictors of overall complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes in the OHR cohort were, in general, superior compared with both the LHR and RHR. However, these strategies should be viewed as complementary. The best approach to an inguinal hernia repair rests on the specific expertise of the surgeon.

How I do it: the horizontal-bilateral unfolding method for self-gripping (Progrip™) mesh placement in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair

BACKGROUND

The use of the self-gripping mesh (Progrip™) during laparoscopic inguinal hernia has been proved to be effective and eliminates the need of additional fixation. However, the deployment of the self-gripping mesh is challenging due to its adhesive property. The purpose of this study was to introduce and describe an easy self-gripping mesh deployment method in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

The self-gripping mesh was folded bilaterally towards the center of the mesh and placed vertically to align with the inferior epigastric artery, centered on the internal defect, then unfolded in a horizontal-bilateral unfolding method, first laterally, then medially.

RESULTS

A total of 63 inguinal hernias were repaired laparoscopicly: 40 patients by TAPP or TEP technique with self-gripping mesh, and there were no perioperative complications. The average time of mesh placement was 186 s (45-250 s). The patients only feel minimal pain (less than VAS 3) the second postoperative morning, and most of the patients were discharged the next day postoperatively; the average postoperative hospital duration was 1 day (1-2 days).

CONCLUSION

The present "horizontal-bilateral unfolding" mesh deployment method is a relative easy method to implant the self-gripping mesh during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

Security and Radical Assessment in Open, Laparoscopic, Robotic Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Comparative Study

Purpose:

This retrospective study was designed to assess the safety and effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, robotic colorectal cancer surgery.

Methods:

Three hundred patients with colorectal cancer who underwent curative resection in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University between February 2014 and May 2016 were included. Patients were classified into open surgery group, laparoscopic surgery group, and robot-assisted group.

Results:

The blood loss in laparoscopic surgery group was less than that in open surgery group, and the blood loss in robot-assisted group less was than the open surgery group. The number of lymph node dissection in robot-assisted group was significantly larger than that in the open group (P < .05). The distance between the lower edge of the tumor group and the distal margin in robotic group was longer than that of the laparoscopic surgery group and the open group (P < .05). Three (2.8%) cases of urinary retention occurred in the open surgery group, 4 (3.92%) cases in the laparoscopic surgery group, and 1 (1.1%) case in the robot-assisted group, while 2 (1.87%) cases of sexual dysfunction occurred in the open surgery group, 2 (1.96%) cases in the laparoscopic surgery group, and 1 (1.1%) case in the robot-assisted group. The urinary retention and sexual dysfunction rate did not differ between the 3 groups (P > .05), but the minimally invasive group showed a certain advantage over the open group.

Conclusion:

Compared to the traditional open surgery, minimally invasive surgery (especially in robot-assisted group) has advantages such as less intraoperative bleeding, rapid postoperative recovery, and radical cure; open group, laparoscopic surgery group, and robot-assisted group have a similar incidence of postoperative complications, but reduction in the incidence of anastomotic leakage and intestinal obstruction. Robot-assisted group has the potential advantage for pelvic autonomic nerve protection.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a comprehensive cost analysis

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery is still debatable. Robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair has no clear clinical benefit over laparoscopic repair. We performed a comprehensive cost-analysis comparison between the two approaches for evaluation of their cost-effectiveness in a large healthcare system in the Western United States.

METHODS

Health records in 32 hospitals were queried for procedural costs of inguinal hernia repairs between January 2015 and March 2017. Elective robotic-assisted or laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repairs were included. Cost calculations were done using a utilization-based costing model. Total cost included: fixed cost, which comprises medical device and personnel costs, and variable cost, which comprises disposables and reusable instruments costs. Other outcome measures were length of stay (LOS), conversion to open, and operative times. Statistics were done using t test for continuous variables and χ² test for categorical variables. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 2405 cases, 734 robotic-assisted (633 Primary: 101 recurrent) and 1671 laparoscopic (1471 Primary: 200 recurrent), were included. The average total cost was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the robotic-assisted group ($5517) compared to the laparoscopic group ($3269). However, the average laparoscopic variable cost ($1105) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than the robotic-assisted cost ($933). Whereas there was no significant difference between the two groups for LOS and conversion to open, average operative times were significantly higher in the robotic-assisted group (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis for primary and recurrent inguinal hernias matched the overall results.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair has a significantly higher cost and significantly longer operative times, compared to the laparoscopic approach. The study has shown that only fixed cost contributes to the cost difference between the two approaches. Medical device cost plus the longer operative times are the main factors driving the cost difference. Laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repair is more cost-effective compared to a robotic-assisted approach.

Robot-assisted abdominal wall surgery: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The number of robot-assisted hernia repairs is increasing, but the potential benefits have not been well described. The aim of this study was to evaluate the available literature reporting on outcomes after robot-assisted hernia repairs.

METHODS

This is a qualitative review and meta-analysis of papers evaluating short-term outcomes after inguinal or ventral robot-assisted hernia repair compared with either open or laparoscopic approach. The primary outcome was postoperative complications and secondary outcomes were duration of surgery, postoperative length of stay and financial costs.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. Postoperative complications were significantly decreased after robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair compared with open repair. There were no differences in complications between robot-assisted and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. For ventral hernia repair, sutured closure of the defect, retromuscular mesh placement and transversus abdominis release is feasible when using the robot. Length of stay was decreased by a mean of 3 days for robot-assisted repairs compared with open approach. There were no differences in postoperative complications and the operative time was significantly longer for robot-assisted ventral hernia repair compared with laparoscopic or open approach.

CONCLUSIONS

For ventral hernias that would normally require an open procedure, a robot-assisted repair may be a good option, as the use of a minimally invasive approach for these procedures decreases length of stay significantly. For inguinal hernias, the benefit of the robot is questionable. Randomized controlled trials and prospective studies are needed.