Robotic inguinal hernia repair: is the new Da Vinci single port platform providing any benefit?
- PMID: 36282359
- DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09737-2
Robotic inguinal hernia repair: is the new Da Vinci single port platform providing any benefit?
Abstract
Background: The utilization of the robot for inguinal hernia repairs has increased in the past years. The new Da Vinci Single Port (SP) system provides the benefits of single-incision procedures and might overcome the technical difficulties of previous single-incision techniques. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the SP transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (SP-TAPP) and compare its outcomes to the robotic multiport technique (MP-TAPP).
Methods: A prospective cohort of patients who underwent a robotic SP-TAPP and MP-TAPP between 2012 and 2022 was analyzed. Primary endpoints were same-day discharge, morbidity, and inguinal recurrence rates. Secondary endpoints included conversion, operative time, port-site incisional hernia, and chronic pain.
Results: MP-TAPP and SP-TAPP were performed in 378 (81.3%) and 87 (18.7%) patients, respectively. Demographics were similar between groups. There were no conversions or intraoperative complications. Mean operative (MP-TAPP: 93.2 vs. SP-TAPP: 78.1 min, p = 0.003) and recovery time (MP-TAPP: 160.8 vs SP-TAPP: 112.6 min, p < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the SP group. Same-day discharge rate was higher (MP-TAPP: 86.5% vs. SP-TAPP: 97.7%, p = 0.001) after SP-TAPP; 30-day morbidity, readmissions, and chronic pain rates were similar between groups. After a mean follow-up of 30.6 months for MP-TAPP and 13.3 months for SP-TAPP, inguinal hernia recurrence and port-site incisional rates were similar between groups.
Conclusion: Robotic SP-TAPP is safe and feasible. When compared to MP-TAPP, it showed similar postoperative morbidity, higher same-day discharge rates, and a quicker postoperative recovery. Further studies are needed to confirm the benefits of the SP platform.
Keywords: Da Vinci SP; Inguinal hernia; Robotic single port; Robotic surgery; Single-incision surgery; TAPP.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- HerniaSurge Group (2018) International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22(1):1–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x - DOI
-
- Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, Bouillot JL, Campanelli G, Conze J, de Lange D, Fortelny R, Heikkinen T, Kingsnorth A, Kukleta J, Morales-Conde S, Nordin P, Schumpelick V, Smedberg S, Smietanski M, Weber G, Miserez M (2009) European Hernia society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia 13(4):343–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-009-0529-7 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Schmedt CG, Sauerland S, Bittner R (2005) Comparison of endoscopic procedures vs Lichtenstein and other open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc 19(2):188–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-9126-0 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Cardinali L, Mazzetti CH, Cadenas Febres A, Repullo D, Bruyns J, Dapri G (2018) Prospective randomized study comparing single-incision laparoscopic versus multi-trocar laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair at 2 years. Surg Endosc 32(7):3262–3272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6045-z - DOI - PubMed
-
- Sajid MS, Khawaja AH, Sayegh M, Baig MK (2016) A systematic review comparing single-incision versus multi-incision laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia repair with mesh. Int J Surg 29:25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.02.088 - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous