Clinical outcomes and costs of retromuscular and intraperitoneal onlay mesh techniques in robotic incisional hernia repair
- PMID: 38568440
- DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10776-0
Clinical outcomes and costs of retromuscular and intraperitoneal onlay mesh techniques in robotic incisional hernia repair
Abstract
Background: This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and financial cost of intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) versus retromuscular (RM) repairs in robotic incisional hernia repairs (rIHR).
Methods: Patients who underwent either IPOM or RM elective rIHR from 2012 to 2022 were included. Demographics, operative details, postoperative outcomes, and hospital costs were directly compared.
Results: Sixty-nine IPOM and 55 RM were included. Age and body mass index (BMI) did not differ between both groups (IPOM vs RM: 59.3 ± 11.2 years vs. 57.5 ± 14 years, p = 0.423; BMI 34.1 ± 6.3 vs. BMI 33.2 ± 6.9, p = 0.435, respectively). Comorbidities and hernia characteristics were comparable. Extensive lysis of adhesions (> 30 min) was required more often in IPOM (18 vs. 6 in RM, p = 0.034). Defect closure was achieved in 100% of RM vs. 81.2% in IPOM (p < 0.001). Median (interquartile range) postoperative pain score was higher in RM than in IPOM [5(3-7) vs. 4(3-5), respectively, p = 0.006]. Median length of stay (0 day) and same-day discharge rate did not differ between groups (p = 0.598, p = 0.669, respectively). Six (8.7%) patients in the IPOM group versus one (1.8%) patient in the RM group were readmitted to hospital within 30 days postoperatively (p = 0.099). Perioperative complications were higher in IPOM (p = 0.011; 34.8% vs. 14.5% in RM) with higher Comprehensive Complication Index® morbidity scores [0(0-12.2) vs 0(0-0) in RM, p = 0.008)], Clavien-Dindo grade-II complications (8 vs 0 in RM, p = 0.009), and surgical site events (17 vs. 5 in RM, p = 0.024). Within a follow-up period of 57(± 28) months, recurrence rates were similar between both groups. Hospital costs did not differ between groups [IPOM: $9978 (7031-12,926) vs. RM: $8961(6701-11,222), p = 0.300]. Although postoperative complication costs were higher in IPOM ($2436 vs RM: $161, p = 0.020), total costs were comparable [IPOM: $12,415(8700-16,130) vs. RM: $9123(6789-11,457), p = 0.080].
Conclusion: Despite retromuscular repairs having lower postoperative complications than intraperitoneal onlay mesh repairs, both techniques offered encouraging results in robotic incisional hernia repair at a comparable total cost.
Keywords: Costs; Incisional hernia; Onlay; Outcomes; Retromuscular; Robotic.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Similar articles
-
Short-term outcomes after robot-assisted retromuscular versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair of small-to-medium ventral hernias: a prospective, multicenter, propensity score-matched analysis.Hernia. 2025 Aug 23;29(1):257. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03431-7. Hernia. 2025. PMID: 40848147
-
"Comparative safety and efficacy of robotic TAPP and IPOM techniques in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Short-term Outcomes".Hernia. 2025 Aug 19;29(1):255. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03454-0. Hernia. 2025. PMID: 40828228 Free PMC article.
-
Drain versus no drain in elective open incisional hernia repair: a propensity score matching analysis using the ACHQC database.Hernia. 2025 Aug 29;29(1):261. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03439-z. Hernia. 2025. PMID: 40879788
-
Comparing procedural costs and early clinical outcomes of robotic extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) with intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair for midline ventral hernias.Surg Endosc. 2025 Jan;39(1):604-613. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11319-3. Epub 2024 Oct 28. Surg Endosc. 2025. PMID: 39467884
-
Mesh versus non-mesh for inguinal and femoral hernia repair.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 13;9(9):CD011517. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011517.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 30209805 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
A Clinical Study of Anterior Abdominal Wall Hernias and Its Management: A Medical College Experience.Cureus. 2024 Aug 19;16(8):e67209. doi: 10.7759/cureus.67209. eCollection 2024 Aug. Cureus. 2024. PMID: 39295727 Free PMC article.
-
Costing methodologies in robotic ventral hernia repair: a scoping review.Hernia. 2025 May 23;29(1):182. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03358-z. Hernia. 2025. PMID: 40407935
References
-
- Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D, Beck W, Holzman MD (2012) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 16(2):179–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-011-0879-9 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Tol MP, de Lange DC, Braaksma MM, Boelhouwer RU, de Vries BC, Salu MK, Wereldsma JC, Bruijninckx CM, Jeekel J (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343(6):392–398. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200008103430603 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Fink C, Baumann P, Wente MN, Knebel P, Bruckner T, Ulrich A, Werner J, Büchler MW, Diener MK (2013) Incisional hernia rate 3 years after midline laparotomy. Br J Surg 101(2):51–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9364 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Liang MK, Holihan JL, Itani K, Alawadi ZM, Gonzalez JR, Askenasy EP, Ballecer C, Chong HS, Goldblatt MI, Greenberg JA, Harvin JA, Keith JN, Martindale RG, Orenstein S, Richmond B, Roth JS, Szotek P, Towfigh S, Tsuda S, Vaziri K, Berger DH (2017) Ventral hernia management: expert consensus guided by systematic review. Ann Surg 265(1):80–89. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001701 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Walming S, Angenete E, Block M, Bock D, Gessler B, Haglind E (2017) Retrospective review of risk factors for surgical wound dehiscence and incisional hernia. BMC Surg 17(1):19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0207-0 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources