A nationwide evaluation of robotic ventral hernia surgery

Surgical Approach and Long-Term Recurrence After Ventral Hernia Repair

Importance

The prevalence of robotic-assisted anterior abdominal wall (ventral) hernia repair has increased dramatically in recent years, despite conflicting evidence of patient benefit. Whether long-term hernia recurrence rates following robotic-assisted repairs are lower than rates following more established laparoscopic or open approaches remains unclear.

Objective

To evaluate the association between robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open approaches to ventral hernia repair and long-term operative hernia recurrence.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Secondary retrospective cohort analysis using Medicare claims data examining adults 18 years and older who underwent elective inpatient ventral, incisional, or umbilical hernia repair from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020. Data analysis was performed from January 2023 through March 2024.

Exposure

Operative approach to ventral hernia repair, which included robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open approaches.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was operative hernia recurrence for up to 10 years after initial hernia repair. To help account for potential bias from unmeasured patient factors (eg, hernia size), an instrumental variable analysis was performed using regional variation in the adoption of robotic-assisted hernia repair over time as the instrument. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate the risk-adjusted cumulative incidence of operative recurrence up to 10 years after the initial procedure, controlling for factors such as patient age, sex, race and ethnicity, comorbidities, and hernia subtype (ventral/incisional or umbilical).

Results

A total of 161 415 patients were included in the study; mean (SD) patient age was 69 (10.8) years and 67 592 patients (41.9%) were male. From 2010 to 2020, the proportion of robotic-assisted procedures increased from 2.1% (415 of 20 184) to 21.9% (1737 of 7945), while the proportion of laparoscopic procedures decreased from 23.8% (4799 of 20 184) to 11.9% (946 of 7945) and of open procedures decreased from 74.2% (14 970 of 20 184) to 66.2% (5262 of 7945). Patients undergoing robotic-assisted hernia repair had a higher 10-year risk-adjusted cumulative incidence of operative recurrence (13.43%; 95% CI, 13.36%-13.50%) compared with both laparoscopic (12.33%; 95% CI, 12.30%-12.37%; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94) and open (12.74%; 95% CI, 12.71%-12.78%; HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.64-0.97) approaches. These trends were directionally consistent regardless of surgeon procedure volume.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that the rate of long-term operative recurrence was higher for patients undergoing robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. This suggests that narrowing clinical applications and evaluating the specific advantages and disadvantages of each approach may improve patient outcomes following ventral hernia repairs.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety outcomes of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic techniques for incisional hernia repair.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane databases, and conference abstracts were systematically searched for studies that directly compared robot-assisted versus laparoscopy for incisional hernia repair and reported safety or efficacy outcomes in a follow-up of ≥ 1 month. The primary endpoints of interest were postoperative complications and the length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 2104 results, of which four studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies included 1293 patients with incisional hernia repairs, 440 (34%) of whom underwent robot-assisted repair. Study follow-up ranged from 1 to 24 months. There was no significant difference between groups in the incidence of postoperative complications (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.35-1.21; p = 0.17). The recurrence rate of incisional hernias (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.05-2.29; p = 0.27) was also similar between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries. Hospital length of stay (MD - 1.05 days; 95% CI - 2.06, - 0.04; p = 0.04) was significantly reduced in the robotic-assisted repair. However, the robot-assisted repair had a significantly longer operative time (MD 69.6 min; 95% CI 59.0-80.1; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The robotic approach for incisional hernia repair was associated with a significant difference between the two groups in complications and recurrence rates, a longer operative time than laparoscopic repair, but with a shorter length of stay.

Robotic repair of moderate-sized midline ventral hernias reduced complications, readmissions, and length of hospitalization compared to open techniques

PURPOSE

To compare outcomes of robotic and open repair for uncomplicated, moderate-sized, midline ventral hernias.

METHODS

From 2017 to 2021, patient characteristics and 30 day outcomes for all ventral hernias at our center were prospectively collected. We studied hernias potentially suitable for robotic repair: elective, midline, 3-10 cm rectus separation, no prior mesh, and no need for concomitant procedure. Robotic or open repair was performed by surgeon or patient preference. The primary outcome was any complication using Clavien-Dindo scoring. Secondary outcomes were operative time, length-of-stay, and readmissions. Regression identified predictors of complications.

RESULTS

Of 648 hernias repaired, 70 robotic and 52 open repairs met inclusion criteria. The groups had similar patient demographics, co-morbidities, and hernia size, except that there were more immunosuppressed patients in the open group (11 versus 5 patients, p = 0.031). Complications occurred after 7 (13%) open repairs versus 2 (3%) robotic repairs, p = 0.036. Surgical site infection occurred after four open repairs but no robotic repair, p = 0.004. Length-of-stay averaged almost 3 days longer after open repair (4.3 ± 2.7 days versus 1.5 ± 1.4 days, p = 0.031). Readmission occurred after 6 (12%) oppen repairs but only 1 (1%) robotic repair. A long-term survey (61% response rate after mean follow-up of 2.8 years) showed that the HerQLes QOL score was better after robotic repair (46 ± 15 versus 40 ± 17,  = 0.049). In regression models, only open technique predicted complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic techniques were associated with fewer complications, shorter hospitalization, fewer infections, and fewer readmissions compared to open techniques. Open surgical technique was the only predictor of complications.

Computed tomography measurements to predict need for robotic transversus abdominis release: a single institution analysis

PURPOSE

The radiographic rectus width to hernia width ratio (RDR) has been shown to predict ability to close fascial defect without additional myofascial release in open Rives-Stoppa abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR), but it has not been studied in robotic AWR. We aimed to examine various CT measurements to determine their usability in predicting the need for transversus abdominis release (TAR) in robotic AWR.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective review of 137 patients with midline ventral hernias over a 5-year period who underwent elective robotic retrorectus AWR. We excluded patients with M1 or M5 hernias, lateral/flank hernias, and hybrid repairs. The CT measurements included hernia width (HW), hernia width/abdominal width ratio (HW/AW), and RDR. Univariate, multivariate and area under the curve (AUC) analyses were performed.

RESULTS

58/137 patients required TAR (32 unilateral, 26 bilateral). Patients undergoing TAR had a significantly higher average HW and HW/AW and lower RDR. Multivariate analysis revealed that prior hernia repair was independently associated with need for TAR (p = 0.03). ROC analysis and AUC values showed acceptable diagnostic ability of HW, HW/AW and RDR in predicting need for TAR. Cutoffs of RDR ≤ 2, HW/AW > 0.3, and HW > 10 cm yielded high specificity in determining need for any TAR (97.5% vs. 96.2% vs. 92.4%) or bilateral TAR (95.5% vs. 94.6% vs. 92.8%).

CONCLUSION

History of prior hernia repair was a risk factor for robotic TAR. CT measurements have some predictive value in determining need for TAR in robotic AWR. Further prospective analysis is needed in this patient population.

Systematic review of robotic ventral hernia repair with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite being one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons, there is a lack of consensus regarding the recommended approach for ventral hernia repair (VHR). Recent times have seen the rapid development of new techniques, such as robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the currently available evidence relating to RVHR, in comparison to open VHR (OVHR) and laparoscopic VHR (LVHR).

METHODS

A systematic search of the following databases was conducted: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science. A meta-analysis was performed for the outcomes of length of stay (LOS), recurrence, operative time, intraoperative complications, wound complications, 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation, mortality and costs.

RESULTS

A total of 39 studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, RVHR reduced LOS, intra-operative complications, wound complications and readmission compared to OVHR. Compared to LVHR, RVHR was associated with increased operative time and costs, with comparable clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

There is currently a lack of robust evidence to support the robotic approach in VHR. It does not demonstrate major benefits in comparison to LVHR, which is more affordable and accessible. Strong quality, long-term data is required to help with establishing a gold standard approach in VHR.

Robotic surgery for inguinal and ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopy or open surgery for inguinal (IHR) and ventral (VHR) hernia repair.

METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE were searched up to July 2022. Meta-analyses were performed for postoperative complications, surgical site infections (SSI), seroma/hematoma, hernia recurrence, operating time (OT), intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative bowel injury, conversion to open surgery, length of stay (LOS), mortality, reoperation rate, readmission rate, use of opioids, time to return to work and time to return to normal activities.

RESULTS

Overall, 64 studies were selected and 58 were used for pooled data analyses: 35 studies (227 242 patients) deal with IHR and 32 (158 384 patients) with VHR. Robotic IHR was associated with lower hernia recurrence (OR 0.54; 95%CI 0.29, 0.99; I2: 0%) compared to laparoscopic IHR, and lower use of opioids compared to open IHR (OR 0.46; 95%CI 0.25, 0.84; I2: 55.8%). Robotic VHR was associated with lower bowel injuries (OR 0.59; 95%CI 0.42, 0.85; I2: 0%) and less conversions to open surgery (OR 0.51; 95%CI 0.43, 0.60; I2: 0%) compared to laparoscopy. Compared to open surgery, robotic VHR was associated with lower postoperative complications (OR 0.61; 95%CI 0.39, 0.96; I2: 68%), less SSI (OR 0.47; 95%CI 0.31, 0.72; I2: 0%), less intraoperative blood loss (- 95 mL), shorter LOS (- 3.4 day), and less hospital readmissions (OR 0.66; 95%CI 0.44, 0.99; I2: 24.7%). However, both robotic IHR and VHR were associated with significantly longer OT compared to laparoscopy and open surgery.

CONCLUSION

These results support robotic surgery as a safe, effective, and viable alternative for IHR and VHR as it can brings several intraoperative and postoperative advantages over laparoscopy and open surgery.

Laparoscopic treatment of ventral hernias: the Italian national guidelines

Primary and incisional ventral hernias are significant public health issues for their prevalence, variability of professional practices, and high costs associated with the treatment In 2019, the Board of Directors of the Italian Society for Endoscopic Surgery (SICE) promoted the development of new guidelines on the laparoscopic treatment of ventral hernias, according to the new national regulation. In 2022, the guideline was accepted by the government agency, and it was published, in Italian, on the SNLG website. Here, we report the adopted methodology and the guideline's recommendations, as established in its diffusion policy. This guideline is produced according to the methodology indicated by the SNGL and applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology. Fifteen recommendations were produced as a result of 4 PICO questions. The level of recommendation was conditional for 12 of them and conditional to moderate for one. This guideline's strengths include relying on an extensive systematic review of the literature and applying a rigorous GRADE method. It also has several limitations. The literature on the topic is continuously and rapidly evolving; our results are based on findings that need constant re-appraisal. It is focused only on minimally invasive techniques and cannot consider broader issues (e.g., diagnostics, indication for surgery, pre-habilitation).

The trend and future projection of technology-assisted total knee arthroplasty in the United States

BACKGROUND

As technology-assisted surgery has boosted in the last decades, we aimed to investigate the factors affecting adoption and to predict the future utilization of technology among patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Patients underwent TKA in 2017-2019 in the MarketScan Database were included. Percentage of technology-assisted surgery was calculated. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to analyse the factors and make the prediction.

RESULTS

Of 112,161 TKA procedures, 7.2% were technology-assisted. The proportion of technology-assisted TKA is expected to reach 50% by 2032. The West showed the highest proportion of technology-assisted TKA (12.3%), while the South had the lowest (5.7%). Over time, the Midwest showed the greatest increase in technology adoption (OR = 1.26 compared to the Northeast, 95% CI [1.15, 1.38]).

CONCLUSIONS

Technology adoption rate of TKA will continue to increase for the next 20 years in the United States with a slight geographical variation.

ROBOTIC-ASSISTED VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC INCISIONAL HERNIA REPAIR: DIFFERENCES IN DIRECT COSTS FROM A BRAZILIAN PUBLIC INSTITUTE PERSPECTIVE

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted surgery research has grown dramatically in the past two decades and the advantages over traditional videolaparoscopy have been extensively debated. For hernias, the robotic system can increase intraoperative strategies, especially in complex hernias or incisional hernias.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the direct cost differences between robotic and laparoscopic hernia repair and determine each source of expenditure that may be related to the increased costs in a robotic program from the perspective of a Brazilian public institution.

METHODS

This study investigated the differences in direct costs from the data generated from a trial protocol (ReBEC: RBR-5s6mnrf). Patients with incisional hernia were randomly assigned to receive laparoscopic ventral incisional hernia repair (LVIHR) or robotic ventral incisional hernia repair (RVIHR). The direct medical costs of hernia treatment were described in the Brazilian currency (R$).

RESULTS

A total of 19 patients submitted to LVIHR were compared with 18 submitted to RVIHR. The amount spent on operation room time (RVIHR: 2,447.91±644.79; LVIHR: 1,989.67±763.00; p=0.030), inhaled medical gases in operating room (RVIHR: 270.57±211.51; LVIHR: 84.55±252.34; p=0.023), human resources in operating room (RVIHR: 3,164.43±894.97; LVIHR: 2,120.16±663.78; p<0.001), material resources (RVIHR: 3,204.32±351.55; LVIHR: 736.51±972.32; p<0.001), and medications (RVIHR: 823.40±175.47; LVIHR: 288.50±352.55; p<0.001) for RVIHR was higher than that for LVIHR, implying a higher total cost to RVIHR (RVIHR: 14,712.24±3,520.82; LVIHR: 10,295.95±3,453.59; p<0.001). No significant difference was noted in costs related to the hospital stay, human resources in intensive care unit and ward, diagnostic tests, and meshes.

CONCLUSION

Robotic system adds a significant overall cost to traditional laparoscopic hernia repair. The cost of the medical and robotic devices and longer operative times are the main factors driving the difference in costs.

Patient-reported outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROM's) are increasingly used to assess surgical outcomes in low-risk surgeries such as minimally invasive primary ventral and incisional hernia repair. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to systematically summarize the available evidence for the effect of laparoscopic versus robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair on PROM's.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Randomised control trials, retrospective and prospective studies were included. Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL, and two trial registers were searched. Pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The overall quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

Of the 2728 titles screened, eight studies involving 41,205 participants were included. Return to activities of daily living, return to work day and recurrence rate were statistically better in the robotic group. Length of stay, readmission, postoperative pain, quality of life, body image, and patient satisfaction were similar in both groups. The GRADE rating of the quality of evidence was moderate for postoperative pain and low to very low for the quality of life, length of stay, recurrence and readmission.

CONCLUSION

The available data of PROM's of laparoscopic and robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair is scarce and highly heterogeneous, thus making it difficult to assess the superiority of the laparoscopic technique over the robotic technique. Further studies with uniform reporting of PROM's in laparoscopic and robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair are needed.

Clinical outcomes and cost of robotic ventral hernia repair: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Robotic ventral hernia repair (VHR) has seen rapid adoption, but with limited data assessing clinical outcome or cost. This systematic review compared robotic VHR with laparoscopic and open approaches.

METHODS

This systematic review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles with terms relating to 'robot-assisted', 'cost effectiveness', and 'ventral hernia' or 'incisional hernia' from 1 January 2010 to 10 November 2020. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, pain, recurrence, and cost data were extracted for narrative analysis.

RESULTS

Of 25 studies that met the inclusion criteria, three were RCTs and 22 observational studies. Robotic VHR was associated with a longer duration of operation than open and laparoscopic repairs, but with fewer transfusions, shorter hospital stay, and lower complication rates than open repair. Robotic VHR was more expensive than laparoscopic repair, but not significantly different from open surgery in terms of cost. There were no significant differences in rates of intraoperative complication, conversion to open surgery, surgical-site infection, readmission, mortality, pain, or recurrence between the three approaches.

CONCLUSION

Robotic VHR was associated with a longer duration of operation, fewer transfusions, a shorter hospital stay, and fewer complications compared with open surgery. Robotic VHR had higher costs and a longer operating time than laparoscopic repair. Randomized or matched data with standardized reporting, long-term outcomes, and cost-effectiveness analyses are still required to weigh the clinical benefits against the cost of robotic VHR.

A pragmatic, evidence-based approach to coding for abdominal wall reconstruction

PURPOSE

Ambiguity exists defining abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) and associated Current Procedural Terminology code usage in the context of ventral hernia repair (VHR), especially with recent adoption of laparoscopic and robotic-assisted AWR techniques. Current guidelines have not accounted for the spectrum of repair complexity and have relied on expert opinion. This study aimed to develop an evidence-based definition and coding algorithm for AWR based on myofascial releases performed.

METHODS

Three vignettes and associated outcomes were evaluated in adult patients who underwent elecive VHR with mesh between 2013 and 2020 in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative including: (1) no myofascial release (NR), (2) posterior rectus sheath myofascial release (PRS), and (3) PRS with transversus abdominis release or external oblique release (PRS-TA/EO). The primary outcome measure was operative time based on the following categories (min): 0-59, 60-119, 120-179, 180-239, and 240 + ; secondary outcomes included disease severity measures and 30-day postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

15,246 patients were included: 7287(NR), 2425(PRS), and 5534(PRS-TA/EO). Operative time increased based on myofascial releases performed: 180-239 min (p < 0.05): NR(5%), PRS(23%), PRS-TA/EO(28%) and greater than 240 min (p < 0.05): NR (4%), PRS (17%), PRS-TA/EO(44%). A dose-response effect was observed for all secondary outcome measures indicative of three distinct levels of patient complexity and outcomes for each of the three vignettes.

CONCLUSION

AWR is defined as VHR including myofascial release. Coding for AWR should reflect the actual effort used to manage these patients. We propose an evidence-based approach to AWR coding that focuses on myofascial release and is inclusive of minimally invasive techniques.

Minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery: From past to the future

The improvement of the science and art of surgery began over 150 years ago. Surgical core tasks, “cutting and sewing” with hand and direct contact with the organs, have remained the same. However, in the 21st century, there has been a shifting paradigm in the methodology of surgery. The joint union between innovators, engineers, industry, and patient demands resulted in minimally invasive surgery (MIS). This method has influenced the techniques in every aspect of abdominal surgery, such as surgeons are not required to direct contact or see the structures on which they operate. Advances in the endoscope, imaging, and improved instrumentations convert the essential open surgery into the endoscopic method. Furthermore, computers and robotics show a promising future to facilitate complex procedures, enhance accuracy in microscale operations, and develop a simulation to improve the ability to face sophisticated approaches. MIS has been replacing open surgery due to improved survival, fewer complications, and rapid recoveries in recent years. Minimally invasive surgery's further research in diagnostic and therapeutic modalities is under investigation to achieve genuinely “noninvasive” surgery. Thus, MIS has gained interest in recent days and has been improving with promising outcomes.

•

Minimally invasive surgery has interfered with multiple aspects of the surgical approach.

•

Advancement in the endoscope, imaging, and other instrumentations shifting the current methodological conventional surgery.

•

The benefit over risk is the promising primary outcome to achieve an exceptional quality of life.

Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and propensity score matched studies

PURPOSE

There has not been a consensus on the superiority of a surgical approach for minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to compare clinical, and patient-reported outcomes of robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (rVHR) to traditional endo-laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (lapVHR).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Scopus from inception to 16th March 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials and propensity score matched studies comparing rVHR to lapVHR. A meta-analysis was done for the outcomes of operative time, length of hospital stay, open conversion, recurrence, surgical site occurrence and cost.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies (3732 patients) were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Significantly shorter operative times were reported with the lapVHR as compared to rVHR (weighted mean difference (WMD): 62.52, 95% CI: 50.84-74.19). There was also significantly less rates of open conversion with rVHR as compared to lapVHR (WMD: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.09-0.54). No significant differences in patient-reported outcomes that was discernible from the two papers that reported them.

CONCLUSION

Overall, rVHR is comparable to lapVHR with longer operative times but less open conversion. It is, therefore, important to have proper patient selection to maximise the utility of rVHR.

Short-term quality of life comparison of laparoscopic, open, and robotic incisional hernia repairs

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of incisional hernia repair (IHR) include recurrence and quality of life (QOL). Operative approaches include laparoscopic, open, and robotic approaches. Data regarding comparative QOL outcomes among these repair types are unknown. Our study evaluates quality of life after three approaches to IHR.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients undergoing open (OHR), laparoscopic (LIHR), and robotic extra-peritoneal (RIHR) at a single institution from 2009 to 2019 were reviewed from a prospectively managed quality database. Short-term QOL was compared among the three procedures using the Surgical Outcomes Measurement System (SOMS) and Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS), objective pain scores and postoperative narcotic use. Data regarding length of stay (LOS), emergency department (ED) visits, readmission, reoperations and surgical site infection (SSI) were also collected.

RESULTS

A total of 795 patients undergoing IHR were analyzed (418 open, 300 laparoscopic and 77 robotic). Patient were similar in age, gender and co-morbidities. LIHR patients had higher BMI and RIHR patients had larger hernia and mesh size. LOS was longer and rate of SSI was higher for OIHR compared to laparoscopic and RIHR. Patients undergoing LIHR reported increased narcotic use, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and CCS pain scores compared to open and robotic repair. Return to daily activity was 4 days shorter for robotic than open and laparoscopic repair; ED visits, readmissions, reoperations, and other QOL domains were similar.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggests that short-term quality of life after robotic extra-peritoneal IHR is improved compared to open and laparoscopic repair. Additional follow up is required to determine differences in long-term QOL after IHR.

Robotic-assisted ventral and incisional hernia repair with hernia defect closure and intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) experience

BACKGROUND

The most common technique described for robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR) is intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM). With the evolution of robotics, advanced techniques including retro rectus mesh reinforcement, and component separation are being popularized. However, these procedures require more dissection, and longer operative times. In this study we reviewed our experience with robotic ventral/incisional hernia repair (RVHR) with hernia defect closure (HDC) and IPOM.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review and follow-up of 31 consecutive cases of ventral/incisional hernia treated between August 2011 and December 2018. Demographics, operative times, blood loss, length of stay (LOS), hernia size, location, and type, mesh size and type, recurrence, conversion to open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) and complications including bleeding, seroma formation and infection were analyzed.

RESULTS

Mean age was 63.9 years old, with median BMI of 31.24 kg/m². Median hernia area was 17 cm². Mean operating time was 142.61 min (SD 59.79). Mean LOS was 1.46 days (range 1-5), with 48% being outpatient, and overnight stay in 32% for pain control. Conversion was necessary in 12.9% cases. Complication rate was 3% for enterotomy. Recurrence was 14.81% after a mean follow-up of 26.96 months. There was significant association of recurrence with COPD history (P = 0.0215) and multiple hernia defects (P = 0.0376).

CONCLUSION

Our recurrence rate (14.81%) compares favorably to those reported in literature (16.7%) for LVHR with HDC and IPOM. Our experience also indicates that IPOM is associated with satisfactory outcomes, low conversion and complications rates, and short LOS.

Robotic assistance in ventral hernia repair may decrease the incidence of hernia recurrence

Background:

Since the advent of laparoscopic surgery, many studies have shown the advantages of laparoscopic surgery over open surgery for ventral hernia repair (VHR). As robotic surgery is gaining popularity, we sought to compare the outcomes of this newer robotic-assisted technique to the outcomes of established open and laparoscopic techniques to assess for any additional benefit.

Methods:

A meta-analysis research design was employed. Multiple databases were queried for publications over the past 10 years and 23 articles were selected based on pre-determined selection criteria. Data were extracted and the arm-based network meta-analysis method was utilised to examine the effect difference for the three arms of our study: Open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted VHR.

Results:

As expected, laparoscopy had an advantage over open VHR in terms of infection rates. This advantage was also observed in the robotic group over the open group; however, there was no statistical difference between the laparoscopic and robotic groups when infection rates were compared head-to-head. The robotic group had a significant advantage over both the open and more importantly, the laparoscopic groups in recurrence rates.

Conclusions:

The results of this study suggest that robotic surgery maintains some of the advantages of laparoscopic surgery and may also provide the additional advantage of recurrence rate reduction. This may be explained by the ability to perform a more complex hernia repair with robotic assistance secondary to the ease of closure of the fascial defect. More research is needed to validate this finding.

Robotic ventral hernia repair: a safe and durable approach

BACKGROUND

Short-term success following robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (RVHR) is well established; however, data describing outcomes after the first year are limited. In this study, we followed a cohort of patients with an average of 1.8 years of follow-up to demonstrate the durability of this technique and examine risk factors for recurrence.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of RVHR performed by a single surgeon from 2012 to 2016 was done. The technical approach for hernia repair consisted of tension-free primary fascial closure with placement of preperitoneal mesh when possible. The primary end point of hernia recurrence was determined based on physical examination or imaging documented in the medical record. A logistic regression model was used to identify patient risk factors for recurrence.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight RVHRs were performed over 4 years. Mean age was 52.72 ± 13.61 years, BMI was 33.07 ± 7.82 kg/m², and hernia defect size was 70.1 ± 86.3 cm². In terms of patient characteristics, 17.6% of patients were diabetic, 13.9% were smokers preoperatively, 72.2% were ASA class 3 or higher, and 29.6% had prior VHR. Primary fascial closure was achieved in all RVHRs, with 23.1% requiring component separation. Mesh was used in 97.2% of patients: 79.5% had preperitoneal mesh and 17.6% had intraperitoneal onlay mesh. Ninety-eight percent of patients had long-term follow-up at a mean of 625.6 days. Recurrence rate was 12%, with one recurrence attributed to an inguinal hernia fixed concurrently with a midline defect. There were no statistically significant differences in gender, age, BMI, ASA class, incidence of diabetes, smoking status, or number of previous hernia repairs. Hernia defect size and perioperative complications including SSO, ileus, obstruction, or any other medical complication were not predictive of recurrence. Technical approach did not affect outcomes.

CONCLUSION

RVHR is safe and durable with a low recurrence rate at a mean of 21 months postoperatively. Patient characteristics or type of repair were not predictive of recurrence.

Status of Robotic-Assisted Surgery (RAS) in the Department of Defense (DoD)

INTRODUCTION

Since inception of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in 1999, there has been an exponential rise in RAS in both number and complexity of surgical cases performed. The majority of these cases are gynecologic surgery in nature, with only a quarter of them labeled as general surgery. The purpose of this study is to determine if RAS in the Department of Defense (DoD) mirrors these trends.

METHODS

A total of 6,204 RAS cases from across the DoD were reviewed between 01 January 2015 and 30 September 2017 from every Military Treatment Facility (MTF) that employs a robotic surgical device (various models of the da Vinci robotic surgical system by Intuitive Surgical). Specialty, number, and surgeon were recorded for each case. These end points were also examined for trends overtime and compared to similar civilian data.

RESULTS

The number of MTFs performing robotic surgery and the number of cases performed increased significantly. An average of 373 cases per quarter-year were performed in 2015, 647 in 2016, and 708 in 2017. The number of RAS cases increased by about 10% every quarter-year during this time period. RAS was most commonly performed by general surgery in 10 of the 14 MTFs examined.

CONCLUSIONS

MTFs implemented RAS much later than the civilian world. However, since its implementation, the frequency of RAS use has increased at a faster rate in the DoD than in the civilian world. Possible reasons for this are a younger pool of surgeons in the military and less demands on cost-effective productivity, allowing these younger surgeons to focus on emerging technology rather than maximizing surgical cost efficiency. General surgery constitutes the majority of RAS cases in the DoD. It is unclear why this difference from the civilian world exists.

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.

Deciding on Optimal Approach for Ventral Hernia Repair: Laparoscopic or Open

BACKGROUND

The decision to perform laparoscopic or open ventral hernia repair (VHR) is multifactorial. This study evaluates the impact of operative approach, BMI, and hernia size on outcomes after VHR.

STUDY DESIGN

The International Hernia Mesh Registry was queried for VHR (2007-2017). A predictive algorithm was constructed, factoring the impact of BMI, hernia size, age, sex, diabetes, and operative approach on outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 1,906 VHRs, 58.8% were performed open, patient mean age was 54.9 ± 13.5 years, BMI was 31.2 ± 6.8 kg/m², and defect area was 44.8 ± 88.1 cm². Patients undergoing open VHRs were more likely to have an infection develop (3.1% vs 0.3%; p < 0.0001), but less likely to have a seroma develop (6.8% vs 15.3%; p < 0.0001) at mean follow-up 23.2 ± 12.0 months. With multivariate regression controlling for confounding variables, patients undergoing laparoscopic VHR had increased risk of seroma (odds ratio [OR] 1.78; 95% CI 1.05 to 3.03), a decreased risk of infection (OR 0.05; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.42), and had worse quality of life at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively compared with patients undergoing open repair. Recurrent hernias were associated with subsequent recurrence (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.24 to 5.81) and need for reoperation (OR 4.93; 95% CI 2.24 to 10.87). Multivariate predictive models demonstrated independent predictors of infection, including open approach, recurrent hernias, and low ratio of BMI to defect size.

CONCLUSIONS

Ideal outcomes are dependent on both patient and operative factors. Open repair in thin patients with large defects should be considered due to reduced complications and improved quality of life. Laparoscopic repair in obese patients and recurrent hernias can decrease the associated risk of infection.