Comparative analysis of robotic and laparoscopic techniques in hiatal hernia and crural repair: a review of current evidence and outcomes
- PMID: 39123086
- DOI: 10.1007/s10029-024-03126-5
Comparative analysis of robotic and laparoscopic techniques in hiatal hernia and crural repair: a review of current evidence and outcomes
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate the implementation of robotic surgery in hiatal hernia and crural repair, based on the existing literature and to compare this approach to other established techniques.
Methods: We performed a non- systematic literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE on February 25, 2024 for papers published to date focusing on the surgical repair of hiatal hernias using the robotic platform. After eliminating publications based on eligibility criteria, 13 studies were selected for analysis.
Results: Robotic surgery is increasingly utilized in hiatal hernia repair due to its enhanced ergonomics and superior visualization capabilities. Operative times vary, with some studies indicating longer durations for robotic surgery (e.g., Giovannetti et al. demonstrated median operative time of 196 min for robotic compared to 145 min for laparoscopic) while others report shorter times (e.g., Lang F et al. demonstrated 88 min for robotic versus 102 min for laparoscopic). Recurrence rates between robotic and laparoscopic repairs are comparable, with reported recurrence rates of 1.8% for robotic and 1.2% for laparoscopic approaches by Benedix et al. Robotic surgery offers potential advantages, including reduced intraoperative blood loss (e.g., Giovannetti et al. mentioned median blood loss of 20 ml for robotic versus 50 ml for laparoscopic). The length of hospital stay and postoperative complication rates also vary, with some studies suggesting shorter stays and fewer complications for robotic surgery as surgeons become more proficient. Soliman et al. reported a statistically significant reduction in complication rates with robotic surgery (6.3% versus 19.2%).
Conclusions: Robotic surgery presents promising results regarding the length of hospital stay, conversion rate to open surgery and postoperative complication rates when compared to laparoscopy based on the existing literature. Despite the lack of striking differences, robotic hiatal hernia repair is a valid and evolving approach.
Keywords: Hiatal closure; Hiatal hernia; Laparoscopic surgery; Robotic surgery.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Richter JE, Rubenstein JH (2018) Presentation and epidemiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 154:267–276. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.045 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Sandler RS, Everhart JE, Donowitz M, Adams E, Cronin K, Goodman C, Gemmen E, Shah S, Avdic A, Rubin R (2002) The burden of selected digestive diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 122:1500–1511. https://doi.org/10.1053/gast.2002.32978 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Dunn C, Patel T, Bildzukewicz N, Henning J, Lipham J (2020) Which hiatal hernia’s need to be fixed? Large, small or none? Ann Laparosc Endosc Surg. https://doi.org/10.21037/ales.2020.04.02 - DOI
-
- Ma L, Luo H, Kou S, Gao Z, Bai D, Qin X, Ouchi T, Gong L, Hu J, Tian Y (2023) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for hiatal hernia repair: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Robot Surg 17:1879–1890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01636-5 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Tolboom RC, Draaisma WA, Broeders IA (2016) Evaluation of conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic redo hiatal hernia and antireflux surgery: a cohort study. J Robot Surg 10:33–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0558-z - DOI - PubMed - PMC
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
