Current trends and outcomes for unilateral groin hernia repairs in the United States using the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative database: A multicenter propensity score matching analysis of 30-day and 1-year outcomes

BACKGROUND

Different unilateral groin hernia repair approaches have been developed in the last 2 decades. The most commonly done approaches are open inguinal hernia repair by the Lichenstein technique, laparoscopic approach by either total extraperitoneal or transabdominal preperitoneal, and robotic transabdominal preperitoneal approach. Hence, this study aimed to compare early and late postoperative outcomes in patients who underwent unilateral robotic transabdominal preperitoneal, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal, and laparoscopic total extraperitoneal, and open groin hernia repair using a United States national hernia database, the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative Database.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative database was retrospectively reviewed, including all adult patients who underwent elective unilateral groin hernia repair from 2015 to 2022, with a 1:1 propensity score match analysis conducted for balanced groups. The univariate analysis compared the groups across the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative timeframes.

RESULTS

The Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative database identified 14,320 patients who underwent elective unilateral groin hernia repair and had documented 30 days of follow-up. Propensity score matching stratified 1,598 patients to each group (total of 6,392). The median age was 64 years (interquartile range 53-74) for open groin hernia repair, whereas 60 (interquartile range 47-69) for laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal, 62 (interquartile range 48-70) for laparoscopic total extraperitoneal, and 60 (interquartile range 47-70) for robotic transabdominal preperitoneal were noted. Open groin hernia repair had more American Society of Anesthesiologists score 4 (52, 3%) patients (P < .001). A painful bulge was the most common indication (>85%). Operating room time >2 hours was more significant in the robotic transabdominal preperitoneal group (123, 8%; P < .001). Seroma rate was higher in the laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (134, 8%; P < .001). A 1-year analysis had 1,103 patients. Hematoma, surgical site infection, readmission, reoperation, and hernia recurrence at 30 days or 1 year did not differ, with an overall recurrence rate of 6% (n = 67) at 1 year (P = .33). In patients with body mass index ≥30 kg/m2, the robotic approach had lower rates of surgical site occurrence (n = 12, 4%; P = .002) and seroma (n = 5, 2%; P < .001) compared with the other groups. When evaluating recurrence 1 year after surgery, the robotic transabdominal preperitoneal group had 10% versus 18% open groin hernia repair, 11% laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal, and 18% laparoscopic total extraperitoneal, but it was not statistically significant (P = .53).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in readmission, reoperation, and surgical site infection among the surgical techniques at 30 days. However, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal was associated with more seromas. Hernia recurrence at 1 year was similar across groups; the robotic approach had the lowest recurrence rate among all 3 repairs but did not reach statistical significance. The robotic approach performed better in patients with a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 for surgical site occurrence and seroma than in other surgical techniques.

Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Sleeve Gastrectomy and Implications for Surgical Resident Education

Introduction: Resident participation in advanced minimally invasive and bariatric surgeries is controversial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety of resident participation in robotic and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Methods: Prospectively maintained institutional Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients who underwent SG, which was performed at our institution between January, 2018, and December, 2021. Operative notes were reviewed to determine the training level of the assistant. These were then classified into 7 groups: postgraduate years 1-5 residents, bariatric fellow (6), and attending surgeons (7). Each group was stratified and their outcomes, which included duration of surgery, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, readmissions, and reoperations, were compared. Results: Out of 2571 cases, the assistants for the procedures were minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellows (n = 863, 58.8%), fifth- and fourth-year residents (n = 228, 15.5%), third- and second-year residents (n = 164, 11.2%), no assistants (n = 212, 14.5%), and 134 robotic SG. Mean body mass index was higher in cases wherein the attending surgeon performed by himself (47.1, standard deviation 7.7) when compared with other groups. There were no conversions to open. Mean LOS was 1.3 days, and there was no difference between groups (P = .242). Postoperative complications were low, with 11 reoperations in 30 days (3.3%) and no difference between groups. There was no mortality in 30 or 90 days. Conclusion: Postoperative outcomes were similar for patients who underwent SG regardless of the assistant's level of training. Including residents in bariatric procedures is safe and does not affect patient safety. Encouraging residents to participate in complex MIS procedures is recommended as part of their training.