Comparison of perioperative and mid-term outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repair

Kudsi, Omar Yusef; Bou‐Ayash, Naseem; Kaoukabani, Georges; Gökçal, Fahri

doi:10.1007/s00464-022-09433-1

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The distribution of male participants varied across studies, with some studies, such as Aghayeva et al [ The included studies exhibited diverse designs, including retrospective single-center studies [18,20,[23][24][25][26]32], prospective single-center studies [19,28,30], retrospective multicenter studies [21,29,31], and prospective multicenter studies [27]. Additionally, a prospective randomized trial with a multicenter design was conducted by Prabhu et al [30].…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forest plot of the surgical duration for robot-assisted versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]30,32] Overall Complications…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The distribution of male participants varied across studies, with some studies, such as Aghayeva et al [ 18 ], Ayuso et al [ 19 ], Charles et al [ 20 ], Huerta et al [ 23 ], Khoraki et al [ 24 ], Kudsi et al [ 25 ], Kudsi et al [ 26 ], LeBlanc et al [ 27 ], Muysoms et al [ 28 ], Prabhu et al [ 30 ], Tatarian et al [ 31 ], and Waite et al [ 32 ], reporting percentages above 90%, indicating a predominance of male participants.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…FIGURE 3: Forest plot of overall complications in robot-assisted versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair patients[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparing Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Khewater,

Al Madshush,

Altidlawi

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inguinal hernia repair is a common surgical intervention. Advancements in minimally invasive techniques, specifically laparoscopic (LR) and robot-assisted (RR) approaches, have reshaped the landscape of surgical options. This meta-analysis aimed to systematically assess and compare the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic and robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair through a comprehensive review of the literature. A systematic search of databases was conducted to identify relevant studies published up to November 30, 2023. Fifteen studies, encompassing a total of 64,568 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Pooled estimates for key outcomes, including duration of operation, overall complications, and surgical site infection (SSI), were calculated using random-effects models. This meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in the duration of surgery, favoring laparoscopic repair over robot-assisted techniques (mean difference: 26.85 minutes, 95% CI (1.16, 52.54)). Overall complications did not significantly differ between the two approaches (odds ratio: 1.54, 95% CI (0.83, 2.85)). However, a significantly greater risk of SSI was identified for robot-assisted procedures (odds ratio: 3.32, 95% CI (2.63, 4.19)). This meta-analysis provides insights into the comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic and robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair. While laparoscopy has shorter operative times and comparable overall complication rates, the increased risk of SSI during robot-assisted procedures necessitates careful consideration in clinical decisionmaking. Surgeons and healthcare providers should weigh these findings according to patient characteristics, emphasizing a personalized approach to surgical decision-making. The evolving landscape of inguinal hernia repair warrants ongoing research to refine techniques and optimize outcomes for the benefit of patients undergoing these procedures.

show abstract

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forest plot of the surgical duration for robot-assisted versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]30,32] Overall Complications…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…FIGURE 3: Forest plot of overall complications in robot-assisted versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair patients[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparing Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Khewater,

Al Madshush,

Altidlawi

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Inguinal hernia repair (IHR), one of the most performed surgeries worldwide with more than 20 million cases annually [ 6 ], is typically performed as an outpatient procedure. In addition, the minimally invasive approach has become more appealing thanks to reduced postoperative pain and accelerated return to work, along with the possibility of a same-day discharge [ 7 , 8 ]. IHR was of interest in this study to understand if the pandemic caused a shift in what is considered to be a straightforward and routinely performed procedure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of COVID-19 on clinical outcomes of robotic inguinal hernia repair

Kudsi

Kaoukabani

Friedman

et al. 2023

Hernia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the clinical impact of the clinical outcomes of robotic inguinal hernia repair. Methods Patients who underwent RIHR 2 years before and after March 10, 2020, were included in this retrospective study and assigned accordingly to the pre- or post-COVID group. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative variables including patients’ demographics, hernia characteristics, complications, and hernia recurrence rates were compared between groups. Results 183 (94.5% male) and 141 (96.4% male) patients were assigned to the pre- and post-COVID groups, respectively. Patient demographics and medical comorbidities did not differ between groups. Operative time was approximately 40 min longer in the post-COVID group ( p < 0.001) with higher rates of bilateral IHR (pre-COVID: 30.1% vs. post-COVID: 46.4%, p = 0.003). Mesh material differed between groups with predominance of polyester mesh in the pre-COVID group vs. polypropylene in the post-COVID one. Median hospital length of stay (LOS) was 0 days in both groups, and same-day discharge rates were 93.4% pre-pandemic and 92.8% post-pandemic ( p = 0.09). There were no pulmonary complications recorded in either group or no cases of COVID-19 detected within two weeks postoperatively in the post-COVID group. Seromas were more frequent in the post-COVID group (pre-COVID: 2 vs. post-COVID: 8, p = 0.018) and no hernia recurrences were recorded. Conclusion This is the first study to describe the impact of COVID-19 on RIHR. Clinical outcomes and hernia-specific complications were not impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract