Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: multicenter, blinded randomized controlled trial

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.

Efficiency and productivity gains of robotic surgery: The case of the English National Health Service

This paper examines the effect of new medical technology (robotic surgery) on efficiency gains and productivity changes for surgical treatment in patients with prostate cancer from the perspective of a public health sector organization. In particular, we consider three interrelated surgical technologies within the English National Health System: robotic, laparoscopic and open radical prostatectomy. Robotic and laparoscopic techniques are minimally invasive procedures with similar clinical benefits. While the clinical benefits in adopting robotic surgery over laparoscopic intervention are unproven, it requires a high initial investment cost and carries high on-going maintenance costs. Using data from Hospital Episode Statistics for the period 2000-2018, we observe growing volumes of prostatectomies over time, mostly driven by an increase in robotic-assisted surgeries, and further analyze whether hospital providers that adopted a robot see improved measures of throughput. We then quantify changes in total factor and labor productivity arising from the use of this technology. We examine the impact of robotic adoption on efficiency gains employing a staggered difference-in-difference estimator and find evidence of a 50% reduction in length of stay (LoS), 49% decrease in post-LoS and 44% and 46% decrease in postoperative visits after 1 year and 2 years, respectively. Productivity analysis shows the growth in radical prostatectomy volume is sustained with a relatively stable number of urology surgeons. The robotic technique increases total production at the hospital level between 21% and 26%, coupled with a 29% improvement in labor productivity. These benefits lend some, but not overwhelming support for the large-scale hospital investments in such costly technology.

Robotic Evaluation and Repair of Penetrating Injury of the Abdominal Wall

This case demonstrated the feasibility of robotic-assisted exploratory laparoscopy in a hemodynamically stable trauma patient and abdominal wall repair with a favorable outcome. The patient presented with a stab wound at the left middle posterior flank. A computer tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated penetrating soft tissue injury to the left lateral abdominal wall with herniation of the omentum. A robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach was implemented to evaluate for visceral injury and to repair the abdominal wall. Diagnostic laparoscopy ruled out visceral and diaphragmatic injuries, and robotic primary tissue repair of the abdominal wall was performed. The patient was discharged home the following day. Laparoscopy for hemodynamically stable trauma patients has shown the benefit of decreased morbidity and decreased hospital stay compared to laparotomy. In turn, the robotic surgical approach has all the benefits of laparoscopy while bringing additional benefits of improved surgical dexterity, visualization, range of motion, and ergonomics.

The emerging role of robotics in plastic and reconstructive surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The role of robotics has grown exponentially. There is an active interest amongst practitioners in the transferability of the potential benefits into plastic and reconstructive surgery; however, many plastic surgeons report lack of widespread implementation, training, or clinical exposure. We report the current evidence base, and surgical opportunities, alongside key barriers, and limitations to overcome, to develop the use of robotics within the field. This systematic review of PubMed, Medline, and Embase has been conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024524237). Preclinical, educational, and clinical articles were included, within the scope of plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2, 181, articles were screened; 176 articles met the inclusion criteria across lymph node dissection, flap and microsurgery, vaginoplasty, craniofacial reconstruction, abdominal wall reconstruction and transoral robotic surgery (TOR). A number of benefits have been reported including technical advantages such as better visualisation, improved precision and accuracy, and tremor reduction. Patient benefits include lower rate of complications and quicker recovery; however, there is a longer operative duration in some categories. Cost presents a significant barrier to implementation. Robotic surgery presents an exciting opportunity to improve patient outcomes and surgical ease of use, with feasibility for many subspecialities demonstrated in this review. However, further higher quality comparative research with careful case selection, which is adequately powered, as well as the inclusion of cost-analysis, is necessary to fully understand the true benefit for patient care, and justification for resource utilisation.

End-colostomy parastomal hernia repair: a systematic review on laparoscopic and robotic approaches

INTRODUCTION

Parastomal hernia (PSH) is the most common and challenging complication after stoma creation, with an estimated 50% incidence 2 years after the index surgery. Mesh repair is the treatment of choice. Laparoscopic and/or robotic approaches allow acceptable outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review from January 2012 to November 2023 was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Embase, PubMed, and Scopus search were performed to select articles dealing with minimally invasive surgical treatment for PSH after end colostomy.

RESULTS

603 studies were found, and 24 were chosen. When compared to open surgery, laparoscopy showed decreased postoperative complications and recurrence. The main laparoscopic approaches are the keyhole (KH), the Sugarbaker (SB), and the sandwich technique. Continuous improvement in surgery, mesh technology, and surgeons' expertise led to an amelioration of surgical outcome and recurrence rate after repair. Recent studies showed comparable outcomes for SB and KH techniques, while novel surgical approaches have been proposed in an attempt to further increase the operative and long-term results. Reports on PSH robotic repairs are scarce and describe small series results, suggesting a role of the initial learning curve as a risk factor for complications.

CONCLUSION

End-colostomy PSH surgical repair still represents a challenge for surgeons. Recent evidence has not shown a significant advantage in postoperative complications and recurrence with a specific repair among SB, KH, and sandwich technique. The paucity of data on robotic surgery does not allow to draw definitive conclusion. Further primary, multicentric, and larger cohort studies are needed.

Is the robotic revolution stunting surgical skills?

This perspective piece aims to examine the impact of the growing utilization of robotic platforms in general and minimally invasive surgery on surgical trainee experience, skill level, and comfort in performing general surgical and minimally invasive procedures following completion of training. We review current literature and explore the application of robotic surgery to surgical training, where minimum case thresholds and breadth distribution are well defined, and where development of surgical technique is historically gained through delicate tissue handling with haptic feedback rather than relying on visual feedback alone. We call for careful consideration as to how best to incorporate robotics in surgical training in order to embrace technological advances without endangering the surgical proficiency of the surgeons of tomorrow.

Key message

The large-scale incorporation of robotics into general and minimally invasive surgical training is something that most, if not all, trainees must grapple with in today's world, and the proportion of robotics is increasing. This shift may significantly negatively affect trainees in terms of surgical skill upon completion of training and must be approached with an appropriate degree of concern and thoughtfulness so as to protect the surgeons of tomorrow.

Hospital costs of robotic-assisted and open treatment of large ventral hernias

Robotic-assisted treatment of ventral hernia offers many advantages, however, studies reported higher costs for robotic surgery compared to other surgical techniques. We aimed at comparing hospital costs in patients undergoing large ventral hernia repair with either robotic or open surgery. We searched from a prospectively maintained database patients who underwent robotic or open surgery for the treatment of the large ventral hernias from January 2016 to December 2022. The primary endpoint was to assess costs in both groups. For eligible patients, data was extracted and analyzed using a propensity score-matching. Sixty-seven patients were retrieved from our database. Thirty-four underwent robotic-assisted surgery and 33 open surgery. Mean age was 66.4 ± 4.1 years, 50% of patients were male. After a propensity score-matching, a similar total cost of EUR 18,297 ± 8,435 vs. 18,024 ± 7514 (p = 0.913) in robotic-assisted and open surgery groups was noted. Direct and indirect costs were similar in both groups. Robotic surgery showed higher operatory theatre-related costs (EUR 7532 ± 2,091 vs. 3351 ± 1872, p < 0.001), which were compensated by shorter hospital stay-related costs (EUR 4265 ± 4366 vs. 7373 ± 4698, p = 0.032). In the treatment of large ventral hernia, robotic surgery had higher operatory theatre-related costs, however, they were fully compensated by shorter hospital stays and resulting in similar total costs.

The compatibility of exoskeletons in perioperative environments and workflows: an analysis of surgical team members' perspectives and workflow simulation

Surgical team members in perioperative environments experience high physical demands. Interventions such as exoskeletons, external wearable devices that support users, have the potential to reduce these work-related physical demands. However, barriers such as workplace environment and task compatibility may limit exoskeleton implementation. This study gathered the perspectives of 33 surgical team members: 12 surgeons, four surgical residents, seven operating room (OR) nurses, seven surgical technicians (STs), two central processing technicians (CPTs), and one infection control nurse to understand their workplace compatibility. Team members were introduced to passive exoskeletons via demonstrations, after which surgical staff (OR nurses, STs, and CPTs) were led through a simulated workflow walkthrough where they completed tasks representative of their workday. Five themes emerged from the interviews (workflow, user needs, hindrances, motivation for intervention, and acceptance) with unique subthemes for each population. Overall, exoskeletons were largely compatible with the duties and workflow of surgical team members.

Robotic Technology in Emergency General Surgery Cases in the Era of Minimally Invasive Surgery

Importance

Although robotic surgery has become an established approach for a wide range of elective operations, data on its utility and outcomes are limited in the setting of emergency general surgery.

Objectives

To describe temporal trends in the use of laparoscopic and robotic approaches and compare outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for 4 common emergent surgical procedures.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study of an all-payer discharge database of 829 US facilities was conducted from calendar years 2013 to 2021. Data analysis was performed from July 2022 to November 2023. A total of 1 067 263 emergent or urgent cholecystectomies (n = 793 800), colectomies (n = 89 098), inguinal hernia repairs (n = 65 039), and ventral hernia repairs (n = 119 326) in patients aged 18 years or older were included.

Exposure

Surgical approach (robotic, laparoscopic, or open) to emergent or urgent cholecystectomy, colectomy, inguinal hernia repair, or ventral hernia repair.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the temporal trend in use of each operative approach (laparoscopic, robotic, or open). Secondary outcomes included conversion to open surgery and length of stay (both total and postoperative). Temporal trends were measured using linear regression. Propensity score matching was used to compare secondary outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery groups.

Results

During the study period, the use of robotic surgery increased significantly year-over-year for all procedures: 0.7% for cholecystectomy, 0.9% for colectomy, 1.9% for inguinal hernia repair, and 1.1% for ventral hernia repair. There was a corresponding decrease in the open surgical approach for all cases. Compared with laparoscopy, robotic surgery was associated with a significantly lower risk of conversion to open surgery: cholecystectomy, 1.7% vs 3.0% (odds ratio [OR], 0.55 [95% CI, 0.49-0.62]); colectomy, 11.2% vs 25.5% (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.32-0.42]); inguinal hernia repair, 2.4% vs 10.7% (OR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.16-0.26]); and ventral hernia repair, 3.5% vs 10.9% (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.25-0.36]). Robotic surgery was associated with shorter postoperative lengths of stay for colectomy (-0.48 [95% CI, -0.60 to -0.35] days), inguinal hernia repair (-0.20 [95% CI, -0.30 to -0.10] days), and ventral hernia repair (-0.16 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.06] days).

Conclusions and Relevance

While robotic surgery is still not broadly used for emergency general surgery, the findings of this study suggest it is becoming more prevalent and may be associated with better outcomes as measured by reduced conversion to open surgery and decreased length of stay.

Artificial intelligence in surgery

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly emerging in healthcare, yet applications in surgery remain relatively nascent. Here we review the integration of AI in the field of surgery, centering our discussion on multifaceted improvements in surgical care in the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative space. The emergence of foundation model architectures, wearable technologies and improving surgical data infrastructures is enabling rapid advances in AI interventions and utility. We discuss how maturing AI methods hold the potential to improve patient outcomes, facilitate surgical education and optimize surgical care. We review the current applications of deep learning approaches and outline a vision for future advances through multimodal foundation models.

[How I Teach It: Robotic Surgery in the Upper GI Tract]

In this manuscript, we present our concept for training in robotic surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract. The training concept presented here focuses on the two surgical "user groups", assistants (table assists) and specialists (surgeons), and presents the core aspects of training for each group separately.For table assistants, we present opportunities for early involvement in robotics and our approach to learning the first steps in preparing for surgery, assisting during surgery, as well as communication as a key factor in robotic surgery and alternative training.For specialists who are to learn how to perform robotic procedures independently, we discuss virtual training using SimNow Trainer and our preferred early clinical application. We will also present assistance options such as the dual console setup and the telestration system. Finally, we present our training concept for developing robotic surgical skills in the upper gastrointestinal tract through a combination of partial steps and increasing difficulty of the procedures. In our view, it is essential to teach the stepstones of robotic surgery and to master them safely. To this end, training must be structured and regular so that more complex sub-steps and procedures can be taken over step by step.

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.

Robot-assisted surgery in thoracic and visceral indications: an updated systematic review

BACKGROUND

In surgical advancements, robot-assisted surgery (RAS) holds several promises like shorter hospital stays, reduced complications, and improved technical capabilities over standard care. Despite extensive evidence, the actual patient benefits of RAS remain unclear. Thus, our systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of RAS in visceral and thoracic surgery compared to laparoscopic or open surgery.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in two databases (Medline via Ovid and The Cochrane Library) in April 2023. The search was restricted to 14 predefined thoracic and visceral procedures and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Synthesis of data on critical outcomes followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology, and the risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's Tool Version 1.

RESULTS

For five out of 14 procedures, no evidence could be identified. A total of 20 RCTs and five follow-up publications met the inclusion criteria. Overall, most studies had either not reported or measured patient-relevant endpoints. The majority of outcomes showed comparable results between study groups. However, RAS demonstrated potential advantages in specific endpoints (e.g., blood loss), yet these findings relied on a limited number of low-quality studies. Statistically significant RAS benefits were also noted in some outcomes for certain indications-recurrence, quality of life, transfusions, and hospitalisation. Safety outcomes were improved for patients undergoing robot-assisted gastrectomy, as well as rectal and liver resection. Regarding operation time, results were contradicting.

CONCLUSION

In summary, conclusive assertions on RAS superiority are impeded by inconsistent and insufficient low-quality evidence across various outcomes and procedures. While RAS may offer potential advantages in some surgical areas, healthcare decisions should also take into account the limited quality of evidence, financial implications, and environmental factors. Furthermore, considerations should extend to the ergonomic aspects for maintaining a healthy surgical environment.

Comparative Analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Open Procedures in Specific General Surgical Interventions

Laparoscopic and open surgeries are two distinct surgical approaches with significantly different procedures and outcomes. Minimally invasive surgery, also known as laparoscopic surgery, utilizes small incisions and specialized instruments like the laparoscope to perform procedures. This contrasts with open surgery, which requires larger incisions to directly access the surgical site. Open surgery was the preferred approach for any invasive procedure until the introduction of new technological advances in the form of laparoscopy. While laparoscopy is still evolving, preliminary results demonstrate promise for various operations. Open surgery provides the healthcare professional with more liberty in the form of increased visualization, but it also increases tissue damage and hospital stays. Laparoscopic and open procedures are both valuable surgical methods with advantages and disadvantages. While open surgery is favored for difficult patients, laparoscopic surgery offers a quicker recovery and fewer scars. The choice between the two approaches depends on the patient's condition, surgical demands, and the surgeon's skills. As these methods develop, they become increasingly important for offering safe and efficient surgical treatments across a range of medical specialties.

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.

Comparison of short-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic liver resection: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to compare short-term outcomes between robotic liver resection (RLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) using data collected from propensity score-matched studies.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to collect propensity score-matched studies comparing RLR and LLR. Relevant data were extracted and analyzed. Odds ratios (ORs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effect models. Meta-regression analysis was performed for primary outcome measures. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed for outcomes exhibiting high heterogeneity. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Twenty-two propensity score-matched studies were included to comprise 5272 patients (RLR group, 2422 cases; LLR group, 2850 cases). Intraoperative blood loss (SMD=-0.31 ml, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.14; P =0.0005), open conversion (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.37-0.58; P <0.0001), and severe complications (OR=0.76, 95% CI 0.61-0.95; P =0.02) were significantly lower in the RLR group. Operation time, odds of use, and duration of Pringle maneuver, length of hospital stay, and odds of intraoperative blood transfusion, overall complications, R0 resection, reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, and 90-day mortality did not significantly differ between the groups. Further subgroup and sensitivity analyses suggested that the results were stable. Meta-regression analysis did not suggest a correlation between primary outcomes and study characteristics. The quality of evidence for the primary outcomes was medium or low, while that for the secondary outcomes was medium, low, or very low.

CONCLUSION

Although some short-term outcomes are similar between RLR and LLR, RLR is superior in terms of less blood loss and lower odds of open conversion and severe complications. In the future, RLR may become a safe and effective replacement for LLR.

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.

[Roboticassisted incisional hernia surgery-Retromuscular techniques]

The trend to minimally invasive surgery has also made its way into the surgical treatment of incisional hernias. Unlike other areas of visceral surgery, recent years have seen a resurgence of open sublay repair in incisional hernia procedures, primarily due to the recognition of the retromuscular layer as the optimal mesh placement site. Additionally, with the growing availability of robotic systems in visceral surgery, these procedures are increasingly being offered in the form of minimally invasive procedures. These methods can be categorized based on the access routes: robotic-assisted transperitoneal procedures (e.g., r‑Rives, r‑TARUP, r‑TAR) and total extraperitoneal hernia repair (e.g., r‑eTEP, r‑eTAR). Notably, the introduction of transversus abdominis muscle release enables the robotic-assisted treatment of larger and more complex hernia cases with complete fascial closure. With respect to the comparison with open surgery required in retromuscular hernia treatment, the currently available literature on incisional hernia repair seems to show initial advantages of robotic-assisted surgery in the perioperative course. New technologies create new possibilities. In the context of surgical training the use of surgical robot systems with double consoles opens up completely new perspectives. Furthermore, the robot enables the implementation of models of artificial intelligence and augmented reality and could therefore open up novel dimensions in surgery.

[Da Vinci robotic complex in hernia repair surgery]

OBJECTIVE

To review the first robotic hernia repairs performed at the Ilyinsky Hospital, evolution of this technology, learning curve and early outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

There were 17 procedures at the Ilyinskaya Hospital between 2021 and 2023 (13 men and 4 women). Mean age was 60 years, body mass index 28 kg/m2. ASA grade 1 was observed in 1 patient, grade 2 - 14 ones, grade 3 - 2 patients. Ventral, inguinal and umbilical hernias were diagnosed in 7, 8 and 2 cases, respectively. Ventral hernias required IPOM+ procedure in 3 cases, eTEP-RS procedure in 2 cases and eTEP-RS-TAR procedure in 2 cases. Patients with inguinal hernia underwent transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair. In case of umbilical hernia, TARUP procedure was performed in 1 case and vTAPP procedure in 1 case.

RESULTS

Mean surgery time was 2 hours 38 min (min 1 hour 35 min, max 10 hours 11 min). There was one intraoperative complication (bleeding from epigastric artery). The follow-up period ranged from 3 months to 3 years. There were no recurrent hernias. Postoperative complications were noted in 2 cases. One patient was diagnosed with epididymitis after TAPP, 1 patient - with seroma after eTEP-RS procedure. All complications were relieved by conservative treatment. Bleeding from a. epigastrica inferior was diagnosed after removal of the trocar at the end of surgery. This event required suturing.

CONCLUSION

Robotic hernia repair appears to be technically feasible and safe. This approach provides favorable results regarding quality of life and recurrence rate.

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.

A preliminary In Vitro viability study of an electrically active hernia mesh on mouse fibroblasts

Hernias occur when part of an organ, typically the intestines, protrudes through a disruption of the fascia in the abdominal wall, leading to patient pain, discomfort, and surgical intervention. Over one million hernia repair surgeries occur annually in the USA, but globally, hernia surgeries can exceed 20 million. Standard practice includes hernia repair mesh to help hold the compromised tissue together, depending on where the fascial disruption is located and the patient's condition. However, the recurrence rate for hernias after using the most common type of hernia mesh, synthetic, is currently high. Physiological-level electrical stimulation (ES) has shown beneficial effects in improving healing in soft tissue regeneration. Piezoelectric materials can produce low-level electrical signals from mechanical loading to help speed healing. Combining the novelty of piezo elements to create an electrically active hernia repair mesh for faster healing prospects is explored in this study through simulated transcutaneous mechanical loading of the piezo element with therapeutic ultrasound. A tissue phantom was developed using Gelatin #0 and Metamucil® to better simulate a clinical application of the therapeutic ultrasound loading modality. The cellular viability of varying ultrasound intensities and temporal effects was analyzed. Overall, minimal cytotoxicity was observed across all experimental groups during the ultrasound intensity and temporal viability studies.

Robotic-assisted repair of incisional hernia-early experiences of a university robotic hernia program and comparison with open and minimally invasive sublay technique (eMILOS)

PURPOSE

With robotic surgical devices, an innovative tool has stepped into the arena of minimally invasive hernia surgery. It combines the advantages of open (low recurrence rates and ability to perform complex procedure such as transverse abdominis release) and laparoscopic surgery (low rate of wound and mesh infections, less pain). However, a superiority to standard minimally invasive procedures has not yet been proven. We present our first experiences of robotic mesh repair of incisional hernias and a comparison of our results with open and minimally invasive sublay techniques.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent robotic-assisted mesh repair (RAHR) for incisional hernia between April and November 2022 (RAHR group) and patients who underwent open sublay (Sublay group) or eMILOS hernia repair (eMILOS group) between January 2018 and November 2022 was carried out. Patients in the RAHR group were matched 1:2 to patients in the Sublay group by propensity score matching. Patient demographics, preoperative hernia characteristics and cause of hernia, intraoperative variables, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis of only midline hernia was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients received robotic-assisted incisional hernia repair. Procedures performed included robotic retro-muscular hernia repair (r-RMHR, 76%), with transverse abdominis release in 56% of the cases. In one patient, r-RHMR was combined with robotic inguinal hernia repair. Two patients (10%) were operated with total extraperitoneal technique (eTEP). Robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair (r-TAPP) was performed in three patients (14%). Median (range) operating time in the RAHR group was significantly longer than in the sublay and eMILOS group (291 (122-311) vs. 109.5 (48-270) min vs. 123 (100-192) min, respectively, p < 0.001). The meshes applied in the RAHR group were significantly compared to the sublay (mean (SD) 529 ± 311 cm2 vs. 356 ± 231, p = 0.037), but without a difference compared to the eMILOS group (mean (SD) 596 ± 266 cm2). Median (range) length of hospital stay in the RAHR group was significantly shorter compared to the Sublay group (3 (2-7) vs. 5 (1-9) days, p = 0.032), but not significantly different to the eMILOS group. In short term follow-up, no hernia recurrence was observed in the RAHR and eMILOS group, with 9% in the Sublay group. The subgroup analysis of midline hernia revealed very similar results.

CONCLUSION

Our data show a promising outcome after robotic-assisted incisional hernia repair, but no superiority compared to the eMILOS technique. However, RAHR is a promising technique especially for complex hernia in patients with relevant risk factors, especially immunosuppression. Longer follow-up times are needed to accurately assess recurrence rates, and large prospective trials are needed to show superiority of robotic compared to standard open and minimally invasive hernia repair.

The Role of Robotics in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction

Robotic abdominal wall reconstruction is becoming an accepted technique to approach complex hernias in a minimally invasive fashion. There remain a deficit of high-quality data to suggest significant clinical benefit but current randomized trials are ongoing. Robotic surgery can be applied to a range of abdominal wall defects safely and with positive outcomes which are at least equivocal to open abdominal wall techniques.

MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGICAL REPAIR FOR ABDOMINAL WALL HERNIAS IN NONHUMAN PRIMATES, TWO CASES IN WESTERN LOWLAND GORILLAS (GORILLA GORILLA GORILLA)

A 33-yr-old female Western lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) was diagnosed with a congenital umbilical hernia that was reducible and asymptomatic; change in the hernia was noted after parturition and concerns regarding increased risk of bowel incarceration developed. The hernia was successfully repaired with robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. A 5-mon-old male Western lowland gorilla presented with bilateral inguinal hernias that were repaired via elective laparoscopic repair. In both cases, the gorillas did well without complications and never appeared to acknowledge wounds or exhibit signs of pain postoperatively. A literature review and interinstitutional survey was conducted to determine success rate of minimally invasive versus open repair of hernias in nonhuman primates (NHP). Of the cases identified, recurrence and/or wound morbidity was seen in 0% of laparoscopic repairs and 50% of open repairs. NHP may benefit from elective, minimally invasive surgical techniques that may reduce hernia recurrences and wound morbidity.

Robotic Enhanced-View Totally Extraperitoneal vs Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Evaluation: 1-Year Exploratory Outcomes of the REVEAL Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with small- to medium-sized ventral hernias randomized to robotic enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) or robotic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (rIPOM) previously demonstrated comparable 30-day patient-reported outcomes. Here we report 1-year exploratory outcomes for this multi-center, patient-blinded randomized clinical trial.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients with midline ventral hernias 7 cm wide or less undergoing mesh repair were randomized to robotic eTEP or rIPOM. Planned exploratory outcomes at 1 year include pain intensity (using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS 3a]), Hernia-Related Quality of Life Survey (HerQLes) scores, pragmatic hernia recurrence, and reoperation.

RESULTS

One hundred randomized patients (51 eTEP, 49 rIPOM) reached a median 12-month follow-up (interquartile range 11 to 13) with 7% lost. After regression analysis adjusting for baseline scores, there was no difference in postoperative pain intensity at 1-year for eTEP compared with rIPOM (odds ratio [OR] 2.1 [95% CI 0.85 to 5.1]; p = 0.11). HerQLes scores were 15 points lower on average (ie less improved) at 1 year after eTEP repairs compared with rIPOM, a difference maintained after regression analysis (OR 0.31 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.67]; p = 0.003). Pragmatic hernia recurrence was 12.2% (6 of 49) for eTEP and 15.9% (7 of 44) for rIPOM (p = 0.834). In the first year, 2 eTEP and 1 rIPOM patients required reoperations related to their index repair (p = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Exploratory analyses showed similar outcomes at 1 year in regard to pain, hernia recurrence, and reoperation. Abdominal wall quality of life at 1 year appears to favor rIPOM, and the possibility that an eTEP dissection is less advantageous in that regard should be the subject of future investigation.

Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Intra- and Post-Operative Complications

BACKGROUND

The use of robotic surgery is attracting ever-growing interest for its potential advantages such as small incisions, fine movements, and magnification of the operating field. Only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored the differences in perioperative outcomes between the two approaches.

METHODS

We screened the main online databases from inception to May 2023. We included studies in English enrolling adult patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery. We used the following exclusion criteria: surgery with the involvement of thoracic esophagus, and patients affected by severe heart, pulmonary and end-stage renal disease. We compared intra- and post-operative complications, length of hospitalization, and costs between laparoscopic and robotic approaches.

RESULTS

A total of 18 RCTs were included. We found no differences in the rate of anastomotic leakage, cardiovascular complications, estimated blood loss, readmission, deep vein thrombosis, length of hospitalization, mortality, and post-operative pain between robotic and laparoscopic surgery; post-operative pneumonia was less frequent in the robotic approach. The conversion to open surgery was less frequent in the robotic approach, which was characterized by shorter time to first flatus but higher operative time and costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic gastrointestinal surgery has some advantages compared to the laparoscopic technique such as lower conversion rate, faster recovery of bowel movement, but it has higher economic costs.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: Two-Year Results From a Prospective, Multicenter, Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

Report the 2-year outcomes of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing robotic versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND

Ventral hernia repair is one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons. To our knowledge, no studies have been published to date comparing long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic ventral hernia repair.

METHODS

The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03490266). Clinical outcomes included surgical site infection, surgical site occurrence, hernia occurrence, readmission, reoperation, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 175 consecutive patients were approached that were deemed eligible for elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. In all, 124 were randomized and 101 completed follow-up at 2 years. Two-year follow-up was completed in 54 patients (83%) in the robotic arm and 47 patients (80%) in the laparoscopic arm. No differences were seen in surgical site infection or surgical site occurrence. Hernia recurrence occurred in 2 patients (4%) receiving robotic repair versus in 6 patients (13%) receiving laparoscopic repair (relative risk: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.06-1.39; P =0.12). No patients (0%) required reoperation in the robotic arm whereas 5 patients (11%) underwent reoperation in the laparoscopic arm ( P =0.019, relative risk not calculatable due to null outcome).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic ventral hernia repair demonstrated at least similar if not improved outcomes at 2 years compared with laparoscopy. There is potential benefit with robotic repair; however, additional multi-center trials and longer follow-up are needed to validate the hypothesis-generating findings of this study.

A novel auxiliary fixation technique of meshes in intraperitoneal onlay mesh procedures for incisional hernia repair

Introduction

Mesh fixation is an important step in incisional hernia repair. Weak fixation possibly results in postoperative pain, and even hernia recurrence. We innovated an auxiliary fixation approach, the magnet attraction technique (MAT), to achieve better mesh fixation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of MAT in intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) procedures for incisional hernia repair.

Methods

Historical patient records were analyzed according to the clinical data of 16 patients with incisional hernias. Among them, 5 patients have undergone IPOM repair procedures in combination with MAT to assist in mesh fixation. As a control, 11 patients treated with IPOM and mesh fixation via conventional suspension were included. The clinical data collected include patients' basic characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative conditions, and follow-up results in both groups.

Results

Compared with patients in the control group, patients in the MAT group were found to suffer from a larger hernia ring diameter and longer surgical duration, but shorter hospitalization length on average. And most importantly, no complication has been reported in the MAT group.

Conclusion

MAT in IPOM operation was regarded as a feasible and safe technique for patients suffering from incisional hernias.

The impact of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair for inguinal hernia treatment: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives

Although laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) has been widely accepted for treating inguinal hernia, the procedure remains very technical and challenging. The present study aimed to assess the effect of LIHR in relation to operation time, intraoperative hemorrhage and postoperative hospitalization.

Methods

A total of 503 patients with inguinal hernia admitted at the Wuxi Rehabilitation Hospital between June 2019 and July 2021 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Binary logistic and linear regressions were used for categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively. The learning curve was drawn by cumulative sum analysis.

Results

Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified LIHR as an independent factor associated with prolonging operation time (odd ratio [OR] = 1.750, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.215-2.520, p = 0.003) and decreasing intraoperative hemorrhage levels (OR = 0.079, 95 CI: 0.044-0.142, p < 0.001). Multivariate linear regression identified LIHR (Coefficient = -0.702, 95% CI: [-1.050] to [-0.354], p < 0.001) as an independent factor for shortening postoperative hospitalization time. After learning curve, LIHR (OR = 1.409, 95% CI: 0.948 to 2.094, p = 0.090) no longer resulted as a risk factor prolonging operation time.

Conclusions

LIHR is an important independent predictive factor for decreasing intraoperative hemorrhage levels and shortening postoperative hospitalization time. Additionally, LIHR does not prolong operation time after the learning curve.

Robotic eTEP versus IPOM evaluation: the REVEAL multicenter randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

For small to medium-sized ventral hernias, robotic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (rIPOM) and enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) repair have emerged as acceptable approaches that each takes advantage of robotic instrumentation. We hypothesized that avoiding mesh fixation in a robotic eTEP repair offers an advantage in early postoperative pain compared to rIPOM.

METHODS

This is a multi-center, randomized clinical trial for patients with midline ventral hernias ≤ 7 cm, who were randomized to rIPOM or robotic eTEP. The primary outcome was pain (0-10) on the first postoperative day. Secondary outcomes included same-day discharge, length of stay, opioid consumption, quality of life, surgeon workload, and cost.

RESULTS

Between November 2019 and November 2021, 100 patients were randomized (49 rIPOM, 51 eTEP) among 5 surgeons. Pain on the first postoperative day [median (IQR): 5 (4-6) vs. 5 (3.5-7), p = 0.66] was similar for rIPOM and eTEP, respectively, a difference maintained following adjustments for surgeon, operative time, baseline pain, and patient co-morbidities (difference 0.28, 95% CI - 0.63 to 1.19, p = 0.56). No differences in pain on the day of surgery, 7, and 30 days after surgery were identified. Same-day discharge, length of stay, opioid consumption, and 30-day quality of life were also comparable, though rIPOM required less surgeon workload (p < 0.001), shorter operative time [107 (86-139) vs. 165 (129-212) min, p < 0.001], and resulted in fewer surgical site occurrences (0 vs. 8, p = 0.004). The total direct costs for rIPOM and eTEP were comparable [$8282 (6979-11835) vs. $8680 (7550-10282), p = 0.52] as the cost savings for eTEP attributable to mesh use [$442 (434-485) vs. $69 (62-76), p =  < 0.0001] were offset by increased expenses for operative time [$669 (579-861) vs. $1075 (787-1367), p < 0.0001] and use of more robotic equipment [$760 (615-933) vs. $946 (798-1203), p = 0.001].

CONCLUSION

The avoidance of fixation in a robotic eTEP repair did not reveal a benefit in postoperative pain to offset the shorter operative time and surgeon workload offered by rIPOM.

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.

Enhancing robotic efficiency through the eyes of robotic surgeons: sub-analysis of the expertise in perception during robotic surgery (ExPeRtS) study

BACKGROUND

Robotic technology affords surgeons many novel and useful features, but two stereotypes continue to prevail: robotic surgery is expensive and inefficient. To identify educational opportunities and improve operative efficiency, we analyzed expert commentary on videos of robotic surgery.

METHODS

Expert robotic surgeons, identified through high case volumes and contributions to the surgical literature, reviewed eight anonymous video clips portraying key portions of two robotic general surgery procedures. While watching, surgeons commented on what they saw on the screen. All interactions with participants were in person, recorded, transcribed, and subsequently analyzed. Using content analysis, researchers double-coded each transcript applying a consensus developed codebook.

RESULTS

Seventeen surgeons participated. The average participant was male (82.4%), 47 (SD = 6.6) years old, had 13.2 (SD = 8.23) years of teaching experience, worked in urban academic hospitals (64.7%) and had performed 643 (SD = 467) robotic operations at the time of interviews. Emphasis on efficiency (or lack thereof) surfaced across three main themes: overall case progression, robotic capabilities, and instrumentation. Experts verbally rewarded purposeful and "ergonomically sound" movements while language reflecting impatience with repetitive and indecisive movements was attributed to presumed inexperience. Efficient robotic capabilities included enhanced visualization, additional robotic arms to improve exposure, and wristed instruments. Finally, experts discussed instrument selection with regards to energy modality, safety features, cost, and versatility.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights three areas for improved efficiency: case progression, robotic capabilities, and instrumentation. Development of education materials within these themes could help surgical educators overcome one of robotic technology's persistent challenges.

Implementation of robotic surgery in Dubai: a focus on outcomes

The rapid acceptance of robotic surgery in gallbladder, inguinal, and ventral hernia surgery has led to the growth of robotic surgery programs around the world. As this is new technology, implementation of such programs needs to be done safely, with a focus on patient outcomes. We herein describe the implementation of a new robotic surgery program in a major hospital in the Middle East. A laparoendoscopic surgeon led the program after training and proctoring. Competency based credentialing were created and put in place. To confirm safety of the program, all laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomy and hernia operations were followed, and perioperative data analyzed. Out of the 304 patients included in this study, 157 were performed using the robotic approach. In the cholecystectomy group (n = 103) the single site approach offered shorter operative times (P < 0.05). Both the single site robotic and the robotic assisted approaches resulted in less pain (P < 0.05). In the inguinal hernia group (n = 146) the laparoscopic approach offered shorter operative times (P < 0.05), but the robotic approach was associated with less pain (P < 0.05). In the ventral hernia group (n = 55), the open approach offered the best operative times, but the robotic approach was associated with the least amount of pain (P < 0.05). This is the first report of the implementation of a robotic program in the MENA region where the primary measure of success is outcomes. We show that monitoring cholecystectomy, inguinal or ventral hernia data can confirm the quality of the program before expansion and moving forward to more complex procedures.

Review of SAGES GERD guidelines and recommendations

BACKGROUND

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) developed evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study is to evaluate guidelines lacking agreement among experts (grades B-D) or lacking support from randomized controlled trials (levels II-III).

METHODS

Six guidelines were chosen for evaluation. A retrospective review of a multicenter database of patients undergoing fundoplication surgery for treatment of GERD between 2015 and 2020 was performed. Patients that underwent a concurrent gastrectomy or were diagnosed with pre-operative achalasia were excluded. Demographics, pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative variables were collected. Post-operative outcomes were evaluated based on selected SAGES guidelines. Outcomes were assessed using multivariable regression or stratified analysis for each guideline.

RESULTS

A total of 444 patients from four institutions underwent surgery for the management of GERD with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 16 (13) months. Guidelines supported by our data were (1) robotic repair has similar short-term outcomes to laparoscopic repair, (2) outcomes in older patients are similar to outcomes of younger patients undergoing antireflux surgery, and (3) following laparoscopic antireflux surgery, dysphagia has been reported to significantly improve from pre-operative values. Guidelines that were not supported were (1) mesh reinforcement may be beneficial in decreasing the incidence of wrap herniation, (2) a bougie has been found to be effective, and (3) the long-term effectiveness of fundoplication in obese individuals (BMI > 30) has been questioned due to higher failure rates.

CONCLUSION

Many SAGES GERD guidelines not receiving Grade A or Level I recommendation are supported by large, multicenter database findings. However, further studies at low risk for bias are needed to further refine these guidelines.

A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic ergonomic risk

INTRODUCTION

Work related injuries in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) are common because of the strains placed on the surgeon's or assistant's body. The objective of this study was to compare specific ergonomic risks among surgeons and surgical trainees performing robotic and laparoscopic procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ergonomic data and discomfort questionnaires were recorded from surgeons and trainees (fellows/residents) for both robotic and laparoscopic procedures. Perceived discomfort questionnaires were recorded pre/postoperatively. Intraoperatively, biomechanical loads were captured using motion tracking sensors and electromyography (EMG) sensors. Perceived discomfort, body position and muscle activity were compared between robotic and laparoscopic procedures using a linear regression model.

RESULTS

Twenty surgeons and surgical trainees performed 29 robotic and 48 laparoscopic procedures. Postoperatively, increases in right finger numbness and right shoulder stiffness and surgeon irritability were noted after laparoscopy and increased back stiffness after robotic surgery. Further, the laparoscopic group saw increases in right hand/shoulder pain (OR 0.8; p = 0.032) and left hand/shoulder pain (0.22; p < 0.001) compared to robotic. Right deltoid and trapezius excessive muscle activity were significantly higher in laparoscopic operations compared to robotic. Demanding and static positioning was similar between the two groups except there was significantly more static neck position required for robotic operations.

CONCLUSION

Robotic assisted surgeries led to lower postoperative discomfort and muscle strain in both upper extremities, particularly dominant side of the surgeon, but increased static neck positioning with subjective back stiffness compared with laparoscopy. These recognized ergonomic differences between the two platforms can be used to raise surgeon awareness of their intraoperative posture and to develop targeted physical and occupational therapy interventions to decrease surgeon WMSDs and increase surgeon longevity.

The United States Experience with One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass at MBSAQIP-Accredited Centers

PURPOSE

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has emerged as a potentially safe and effective weight-loss procedure. Worldwide, OAGB is the third most commonly performed primary bariatric procedure, comprising 4% of the annual volume. In the USA, OAGB has yet to be endorsed as a primary bariatric procedure and can only be performed under research protocols or as a revision procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed an observational cohort study to describe the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics of adult patients who underwent primary or revision OAGB from 2015 to 2019 at MBSAQIP centers. Exclusion criteria included emergent surgery, incomplete 30-day follow-up, and non-laparoscopic- or robotic approach.

RESULTS

During the study period, 803,906 bariatric procedures were performed and 645 (0.08%) were OAGB. Among these, 436 (67.6%) were primary and 209 (32.4%) were revision OAGB. The mean operation time was 89 min (SD, 59) and 8% were performed using a robotic approach. The overall complication rate was 7.4% and there was one death (0.2%). The post-operative complication rates were generally higher than the early complication rate (3.4%) reported in the YOMEGA trial, an RCT from France. Revision OAGB had a longer mean operation time of 141 min (SD, 85, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Primary OAGB was a rarely performed bariatric procedure at MBSAQIP-accredited centers comprising only 0.05% compared to 4% worldwide. Future studies should compare safety of OAGB to that of established bariatric procedures like Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy.

National epidemiologic trends (2008-2018) in the United States for the incidence and expenditures associated with incisional hernia in relation to abdominal surgery

PURPOSE

It is unknown whether the trend of rising incisional hernia (IH) repair (IHR) incidence and costs until 2011 currently persists. We aimed to evaluate how the IHR procedure incidence, cost and patient risk-profile have changed over the last decade relative to all abdominal surgeries (AS).

METHODS

Repeated cross-sectional analysis of 38,512,737 patients undergoing inpatient 4AS including IHR within the 2008-2018 National Inpatient Sample. Yearly incidence (procedures/1,000,000 people [PMP]), hospital costs, surgical and patient characteristics were compared between IHR and AS using generalized linear and multinomial regression.

RESULTS

Between 2008-2018, 3.1% of AS were IHR (1,200,568/38,512,737). There was a steeper decrease in the incidence of AS (356.5 PMP/year) compared to IHR procedures (12.0 PMP/year) which resulted in the IHR burden relative to AS (2008-2018: 12,576.3 to 9,113.4 PMP; trend difference P < 0.01). National costs averaged $47.9 and 1.7 billion/year for AS and IHR, respectively. From 2008-2018, procedure costs increased significantly for AS (68.2%) and IHR (74.6%; trends P < 0.01). Open IHR downtrended (42.2%), whereas laparoscopic (511.1%) and robotic (19,301%) uptrended significantly (trends P < 0.01). For both AS and IHR, the proportion of older (65-85y), Black and Hispanic, publicly-insured, and low-income patients, with higher comorbidity burden, undergoing elective procedures at small- and medium-sized hospitals uptrended significantly (all P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

IH persists as a healthcare burden as demonstrated by the increased proportion of IHR relative to all AS, disproportionate presence of high-risk patients that undergo these procedures, and increased costs. Targeted efforts for IH prevention have the potential of decreasing $17 M/year in costs for every 1% reduction.

Short-term complications after minimally invasive retromuscular ventral hernia repair: no need for preoperative weight loss or smoking cessation?

PURPOSE

Obesity and smoking are associated with postoperative wound complications following open hernia repair. However, with the advancements in minimally invasive surgical techniques, we hypothesized that obese and/or smoking patients undergoing minimally invasive repairs were not subjected to an increased risk of postoperative surgical complications. As opposed to nonobese and/or nonsmoking patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study including patients undergoing minimally invasive retromuscular repair at a single university hospital. Patients were divided into two groups according to exposure; obese vs. nonobese and smoking vs. nonsmoking. One month postoperatively, all patients underwent clinical follow-up. The main outcome was surgical site occurrence (SSO).

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients were included, undergoing both laparoscopic (n = 32) and robotic (n = 62) retromuscular repair. Of these, 7.7% of the obese patients had SSO when compared with 19.1% of the nonobese patients. A total of 17.2% of the nonsmokers had SSO compared with 13.3% of the active smokers. Of the nonsmokers, 12.5% developed seroma and 6.2% hematoma postoperatively, the corresponding numbers were 13.3% and 0% among the active smokers. After multivariable analysis, there was no significant risk factors for developing postoperative SSO.

CONCLUSION

There was no association between obesity or smoking and surgical complication in patients undergoing minimally invasive retromuscular repair. If the results of the current study are confirmed, patients who are unable to obtain weight loss or smoking cessation may be offered minimally invasive retromuscular ventral hernia repair without inducing an increased risk of short-term complications.

Trends in Robot-Assisted Procedures for General Surgery in the Veterans Health Administration

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of robot-assisted procedures is growing. Utilization within the country's largest healthcare network, the Veterans Health Administration, is unclear.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse from January 2015 through December 2019. Trends in robot utilization for cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, and inguinal hernia repair were characterized nationally and regionally by Veterans Integrated Services Network. Patients, who underwent laparoscopic repairs for these procedures and open hernia repairs, were included to determine proportion performed robotically.

RESULTS

We identified 119,191 patients, of which 5689 (4.77%) received a robotic operation. The proportion of operations performed robotically increased from 1.49% to 10.55% (7.08-fold change; slope, 2.14% per year; 95% confidence interval [0.79%, 3.49%]). Ventral hernia repair had the largest growth in robotic procedures (1.51% to 13.94%; 9.23-fold change; slope, 2.86% per year; 95% confidence interval [1.04%, 4.68%]). Regions with the largest increase in robotic utilization were primarily along the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot utilization in general surgery is increasing at different rates across the United States in the Veterans Health Administration. Future studies should investigate the regional disparities and drivers of this approach.

Hernia Defect Closure With Barbed Suture: An Assessment of Patient-reported Outcomes in Extraperitoneal Robotic Ventral Hernia Repair

BACKGROUND

Primary closure of a fascial defect during ventral hernia repair is associated with lower rates of recurrence and better patient satisfaction compared with bridging repairs. Robotic surgery offers enhanced ability to close these defects and this has likely been aided by the use of barbed suture. The goal of this study was to evaluate the perioperative safety and the long-term outcomes for the use of barbed suture for the primary closure of hernia defects during robotic ventral hernia repair (rVHR) with mesh.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of adult patients who underwent rVHR with the use of a barbed suture for fascial defect closure from August 2018 to August 2020 in an academic center. All the patients included were queried by phone to complete a quality of life assessment to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Subjective sense of a bulge and pain at the previous hernia site has been shown to correlate with hernia recurrence. These questions were used in conjunction with a Hernia-related Quality of Life Survey (HerQles) score to assess a patient's quality of life.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients with 102 hernias were analyzed. Sixty patients (74%) were successfully reached and completed the PRO form at median postoperative day 356 (range: 43 to 818). Eight patients (13% of patients with PRO data) claimed to have both a bulge and pain at their previous hernia site, concerning for possible recurrence. Median overall HerQLes score was 82 [Interquartile Range (IQR): 54 to 99]. Patients with a single hernia defect, when compared with those with multiple defects, had a lower rate of both a bulge (15% vs. 30%) and symptoms (33% vs. 48%), as well as a higher median HerQLes score (85 vs. 62) at the time of PRO follow-up. Patients with previous hernia repair had a lower median HerQLes score of 65 (IQR: 43 to 90) versus 88 (IQR: 62-100). These patients also had a higher rate of sensing a bulge (29% vs. 18%), whereas a sense of symptoms at the site was less (33% vs. 44%).

CONCLUSIONS

Barbed suture for fascial defect closure in rVHR was found to be safe with an acceptable rate of possible recurrence by the use of PRO data. Patients with multiple hernias and previous repairs had a higher likelihood of recurrence and a lower quality of life after rVHR.

Surgeon Variation in the Application of Robotic Technique for Abdominal Hernia Repair: A Mixed-Methods Study

INTRODUCTION

Although the utilization of robotic technique for abdominal hernia repair has increased rapidly, there is no consensus as to when it should be applied for optimal outcomes. High variability exists within surgeon practices regarding how they use this technology, and the factors that drive robotic utilization remain largely unknown. This study aims to explore the motivating factors associated with surgeons' decisions to utilize a robotic approach for abdominal hernia repair.

METHODS

An exploratory mixed-methods approach was utilized. Surgeons who performed abdominal hernia repairs were interviewed to identify impactful themes motivating surgical approach. This informed a retrospective analysis of ventral hernia repairs performed in 2020 within the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Surgeon robotic utilization rates were calculated. Among selective robotic users, multivariable regression evaluated the patient and hernia factors associated with robotic utilization.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis of 21 interviews revealed three dominant themes in the decision to utilize robotic technology: access and resources, surgeon comfort, and market factors. Among 71 surgeons caring for 1174 hernia patients, robotic utilization rates ranged from 0% to 98% of cases. There were 27 surgeons identified as selective robotic users, who cared for 423 patients. Multivariable regression revealed that hernia location was the only factor associated with robotic technique, with non-midline hernias associated with a 4.47 (95% confidence interval 1.34-14.88) higher odds of robotic repair than epigastric hernias.

CONCLUSIONS

Major drivers of robotic technique for hernia repair were found to be perceived benefits and availability, rather than patient or hernia characteristics. These data will contribute to an understanding of surgeon decision-making and help develop improvements to patient care.

Robotic vs Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair with Intraperitoneal Mesh: 1-Year Exploratory Outcomes of the PROVE-IT Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic and robotic ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh have been demonstrated previously to have comparable 30-day outcomes in the PROVE-IT randomized clinical trial. Here we report our 1-year follow-up of enrolled patients to examine exploratory outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients enrolled in a previously published, registry-based, randomized trial investigating laparoscopic vs robotic ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh were reviewed. Several exploratory secondary outcomes were assessed: pain intensity (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS 3a]), hernia-specific quality of life (Hernia-Specific Quality of Life Survey [HerQLes]), composite hernia recurrence, and reoperations.

RESULTS

A total of 95% (71 of 75) follow-up was achieved: 33 laparoscopic repairs and 38 robotic repairs. Median follow-up time was 12 months [interquartile range 10 to 12 months]. Following regression analysis adjusting for baseline scores, there was no difference in postoperative pain intensity at 1 year (p = 0.94). However, HerQLes scores increased by 12.0 more points following robotic repairs compared to laparoscopic counterparts (95% CI 1.3 to 22.7, p = 0.03). Composite hernia recurrence was 6% (2 of 33) for the laparoscopic cohort and 24% (9 of 38) for the robotic group (p = 0.04). There was no difference in rates of reoperation (p = 0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Our exploratory analyses have identified potential differences in quality of life and recurrence, favoring the robotic and laparoscopic approaches, respectively. These findings warrant further study with larger patient cohorts to verify their potential significance.

Quality of life and secondary outcomes for open versus robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a double-blinded, randomised feasibility trial

PURPOSE

This study aims to examine quality of life (QoL) before and after radical cystectomy (RC) and compare robot-assisted laparoscopy with intracorporeal urinary diversion (iRARC) to open radical cystectomy (ORC).

METHODS

This study is a predefined secondary analysis of a single-centre, double-blinded, randomised feasibility trial. Fifty patients were randomly assigned to iRARC with ileal conduit (n = 25) or ORC with ileal conduit (n = 25). Patients were followed 90 days postoperatively. The primary outcome was patient-reported QoL using the EORTC Cancer-30 and muscle-invasive bladder cancer BLM-30 QoL questionnaires before and after RC. Differences between randomisation arms as well as changes over time were evaluated. Secondary outcomes included 30- and 90 day complication rates, 90 day readmission rates, and 90 day days-alive-and-out-of-hospital and their relationship to QoL.

RESULTS

All patients underwent the allocated treatment. We found no difference in QoL, complication rates, readmission rates, and days-alive-and-out-of-hospital between randomisation arms. An overall improvement in QoL was found in the following domains: future perspectives, emotional functioning, and social functioning. Sexual functioning worsened postoperatively. There was no association between having experienced a major complication or lengthy hospitalisation and worse postoperative QoL.

CONCLUSION

The QoL does not appear to depend on surgical technique. Apart from sexual functioning, patients report stable or improved QoL within the first 90 postoperative days.

Robotic Ventral Hernia Repair: Lessons Learned From a 7-year Experience

OBJECTIVE

To describe the outcomes of RVHR with varying prosthetic reinforcement techniques.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

As a recent addition to minimally invasive hernia repair, more data is needed to establish the long-term benefits of RVHR and to identify potential predictors of adverse outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent RVHR over a 7-year period were evaluated. Robotic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (rIPOM), transabdominal preperitoneal (rTAPP), Rives-Stoppa (rRS), and transversus abdominis release (rTAR) techniques were compared. The main outcomes were 90-day FFC, and 5-year FFR, depicted through Kaplan-Meier curves stratified by repair type and date.

RESULTS

A total of 644 RVHRs were analyzed; 197 rIPOM, 156 rTAPP, 153 rRS, and 138 rTAR. There was a gradual transition from intraperitoneal to extraperitoneal mesh placement across the study period. Although rTAPP had the highest 90-day FFC (89.5%) it also had the lowest 5-year FFR (93.3%). Conversely, although rTAR demonstrated the lowest FFC (71%), it had the highest FFR (100%). Coronary artery disease, lysis of adhesions, incisional hernia, and skin-to-skin time (10 minutes. increment) were significant predictors of 90-day complications. Incisional hernia was the sole predictor of 5-year recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an in-depth perspective of the largest series of RVHR. Based on this experience, rTAPP is no longer recommended due to its limited applicability and high recurrence rate. Both rIPOM and rRS offer encouraging short- and long-term outcomes, while rTAR is associated with the highest perioperative morbidity. Longer follow-up is needed to assess rTAR durability, despite a promising recurrence profile.