Safety of robotic assisted laparoscopic recurrent paraesophageal hernia repair: insights from a large single institution experience

Hiatal Hernia Repair: A Century Between Soresi and da Vinci

A minimally invasive approach is the most common technique for hiatal hernia repair. The robotic platform offers a unique advantage that addresses the limitations of a laparoscopic repair. The steps of a robotic hiatal hernia repair include reduction of hernia contents, dissection of hernia sac, circumferential dissection of esophagus with 2.5 to 3 cm of intraabdominal esophagus, crural closure, and partial or complete fundoplication. The robotic hiatal hernia repair has comparable perioperative outcomes to the laparoscopic approach. This article discusses current controversies, limitations, and new technologies.

Robotic hiatus hernia surgery: learning curve and lessons learned

New procedures like the robotic approach require proficiency to ensure patient safety and satisfactory functional results. Hiatal hernia surgery serves as a suitable training procedure for upper gastrointestinal tract surgeons transitioning to the robotic approach. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of implementing the robotic approach in hiatal hernia surgery at a tertiary hospital and to assess the associated learning curve. A retrospective review was conducted on 54 patients (58 surgeries) between June 2019 and March 2024, including both primary and revision robotic antireflux surgeries. The study focused on perioperative outcomes, symptom resolution, and the surgical learning curve, assessed using Cumulative Sum analysis. The results showed that global surgical time averaged 124 ± 57 (54-350) min, 127 ± 38 (116-139) for Primary Surgery and 164 ± 84 (115-212) min for Revisional Surgery. There were no conversions to laparoscopic or open approach. The global median of hospital stay was 2 days (2 for Primary Surgery and 3 for Revisional Surgery) and three patients required readmission (2 for Primary Surgery and 1 for Revisional Surgery). Postoperative complications occurred in 3 patients. Symptom resolution was achieved in 90% of Primary Surgery group and 85.7% of Revisional Surgery group. Learning curve described three phases: 1-training (case 1 to 14), 2-plateau (15 to 25) and 3-expertise phase (25 onwards). The robotic approach in hiatal hernia surgery is feasible with minimal morbidity, short hospital stays, and excellent functional results. With previous experience in laparoscopic approach and esophagogastric surgery the learning curve can be reduced to 14 procedures.

Adoption of the Robotic Platform across Thoracic Surgeries

With the paradigm shift in minimally invasive surgery from the video-assisted thoracoscopic platform to the robotic platform, thoracic surgeons are applying the new technology through various commonly practiced thoracic surgeries, striving to improve patient outcomes and reduce morbidity and mortality. This review will discuss the updates in lung resections, lung transplantation, mediastinal surgeries with a focus on thymic resection, rib resection, tracheal resection, tracheobronchoplasty, diaphragm plication, esophagectomy, and paraesophageal hernia repair. The transition from open surgery to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) to now robotic video-assisted thoracic surgery (RVATS) allows complex surgeries to be completed through smaller and smaller incisions with better visualization through high-definition images and finer mobilization, accomplishing what might be unresectable before, permitting shorter hospital stay, minimizing healing time, and encompassing broader surgical candidacy. Moreover, better patient outcomes are not only achieved through what the lead surgeon could carry out during surgeries but also through the training of the next generation via accessible live video feedback and recordings. Though larger volume randomized controlled studies are pending to compare the outcomes of VATS to RVATS surgeries, published studies show non-inferiority data from RVATS performances. With progressive enhancement, such as overcoming the lack of haptic feedback, and future incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI), the robotic platform will likely be a cost-effective route once surgeons overcome the initial learning curve.

BRAZILIAN HERNIA AND ABDOMINAL WALL SOCIETY STATEMENT ON LARGE HIATAL HERNIAS MANAGEMENT

Large hiatal hernias, besides being more prevalent in the elderly, have a different clinical presentation: less reflux, more mechanical symptoms, and a greater possibility of acute, life-threatening complications such as gastric volvulus, ischemia, and visceral mediastinal perforation. Thus, surgical indications are distinct from gastroesophageal reflux disease-related sliding hiatal hernias. Heartburn tends to be less intense, while symptoms of chest pain, cough, discomfort, and tiredness are reported more frequently. Complaints of vomiting and dysphagia may suggest the presence of associated gastric volvulus. Signs of iron deficiency and anemia are found. Surgical indication is still controversial and was previously based on high mortality reported in emergency surgeries for gastric volvulus. Postoperative mortality is especially related to three factors: body mass index above 35, age over 70 years, and the presence of comorbidities. Minimally invasive elective surgery should be offered to symptomatic individuals with good or reasonable performance status, regardless of age group. In asymptomatic and oligosymptomatic patients, besides obviously identifying the patient's desire, a case-by-case analysis of surgical risk factors such as age, obesity, and comorbidities should be taken into consideration. Attention should also be paid to situations with greater technical difficulty and risks of acute migration due to increased abdominal pressure (abdominoplasty, manual labor, spastic diseases). Technical alternatives such as partial fundoplication and anterior gastropexy can be considered. We emphasize the importance of performing surgical procedures in cases of large hiatal hernias in high-volume centers, with experienced surgeons.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

The robotic approach offers improved visualization and maneuverability for surgeons. This systematic review aims to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopic approaches for paraesophageal hernia repair, specifically examining postoperative complications, operative time, hospital stay, and recurrence.

Methods

A systematic review including thorough research through PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane, was performed and only comparative studies were included. Studies concerning other types of hiatal hernias or children were excluded. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare overall postoperative complications, hospital stay, and operation time.

Results

Ten comparative studies, with 186,259 participants in total, were included in the meta-analysis, but unfortunately, not all of them reported all the outcomes under question. It appeared that there is no statistically significant difference between the conventional laparoscopic and the robotic-assisted approach, regarding the overall postoperative complication rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-1.11), the mean operation time (t = 1.41; 95% CI, -0.15-0.52; p = 0.22), and the hospital length of stay (t = -1.54; degree of freedom = 8; 95% CI, -0.53-0.11; p = 0.16). Only two studies reported evidence concerning the recurrence rates.

Conclusion

Overall, the robotic-assisted method did not demonstrate superiority over conventional laparoscopic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair in terms of postoperative complications, operation time, or hospital stay. However, some studies focused on cost and patient characteristics of each group. Further comparative and randomized control studies with longer follow-up periods are needed for more accurate conclusions on short- and long-term outcomes.

Economic evaluation of robotic and laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Robotic approach in paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repair may improve outcomes over laparoscopic approach, though at additional cost. This study aimed to compare cost-effectiveness of robotic and laparoscopic PEH repair.

METHODS

A decision tree was created analyzing cost-effectiveness of robotic and laparoscopic PEH repair. Costs were obtained from 2021 Medicare data and were accumulated within 60 months after surgery. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Branch-point probabilities and costs of robotic surgery consumables were obtained from published literature. The primary outcome of interest was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. A secondary analysis including attributable capital and maintenance costs of robotic surgery was conducted as well.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic repair yielded 3.660 QALYs at $35,843.82. Robotic repair yielded 3.661 QALYs at $36,342.57, with an ICER of $779,488.62/QALY. Robotic repair was favored when rates of open conversion and symptom recurrence were low, or with reduced cost of robotic instruments. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis favored laparoscopic repair in 100% of simulations. When accounting for costs of robotic technology, robotic approach was preferred only in unrealistic clinical scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic repair is likely more cost-effective for most institutions, though results were relatively similar. With experienced surgeons who surpass the initial learning curve, robotic surgery may improve outcomes enough to be cost-effective, but only when excluding capital and maintenance fees.

Cardiac tamponade after robotic hiatal hernia repair from liver sling stitch: Case report of a rare complication and literature review

Introduction and importance

Cardiac tamponade following hiatal hernia repair is a rare and potentially fatal complication most often associated with the use of mechanical fixation devices for hiatal mesh reinforcement. Only three cases have been reported with sutures alone, and none following robotic hiatal surgery.

Case presentation

A 54-year-old patient underwent elective robotic hiatal hernia repair with Toupet fundoplication during which a sling suture was placed to elevate the left lateral segment of liver. No mesh or mechanical fixation devices were used. Eight hours postoperatively, the patient developed hemodynamic instability. Cardiac tamponade was diagnosed on bedside echocardiogram and the patient underwent emergent pericardiocentesis with subsequent stabilization. The remainder of the postoperative course was notable for pericarditis which was treated with aspirin and colchicine.

Clinical discussion

While the use of suture-based liver retraction has the advantages of avoiding an additional port and potential collision between retractor holder and robot arms, it constitutes a novel risk factor for cardiac tamponade. Prompt diagnosis via bedside echocardiography is essential and may facilitate percutaneous rather than operative management.

Conclusion

Suture-based liver retraction in minimally invasive foregut surgery should be used judiciously until further data is available. Surgeons should maintain a high index of suspicion for tamponade in the setting of postoperative hypotension after its use.

•

Hypotension may be a sign of cardiac tamponade after robotic hiatal hernia repair.

•

Slings or other suture techniques that abut the diaphragm may cause tamponade.

•

Prompt diagnosis and drainage can prevent life-threatening hemodynamic compromise.

•

Multidisciplinary care is essential to manage recurrent effusion or pericarditis.

Robotic Foregut Surgery in the Veterans Health Administration: Increasing Prevalence, Decreasing Operative Time, and Improving Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Historically, robotic surgery incurs longer operative times, higher costs, and nonsuperior outcomes compared with laparoscopic surgery. However, in areas of limited visibility and decreased accessibility such as the gastroesophageal junction, robotic platforms may improve visualization and facilitate dissection. This study compares 30-day outcomes between robotic-assisted foregut surgery (RAF) and laparoscopic-assisted foregut surgery in the Veterans Health Administration.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective review of the Veterans Affairs Quality Improvement Program database. Patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted foregut surgery and RAF were identified using CPT codes 43280, 43281, 43282, and robotic modifier S2900. Multivariable logistic regression and multivariable generalized linear models were used to analyze the independent association between surgical approach and outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 9,355 veterans underwent minimally invasive fundoplication from 2008 to 2019. RAF was used in 5,392 cases (57.6%): 1.63% of cases in 2008 to 83.41% of cases in 2019. After adjusting for confounding covariates, relative to laparoscopic-assisted foregut surgery, RAF was significantly associated with decreased adjusted odds of pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.44, p < 0.001), acute renal failure (aOR 0.14, p = 0.046), venous thromboembolism (aOR 0.44, p = 0.009) and increased odds of infectious complications (aOR 1.60, p = 0.017). RAF was associated with an adjusted mean ± SD of 29 ± 2-minute shorter operative time (332 minutes vs 361 minutes; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Veterans undergoing RAF ascertained shorter operative times and reduced complications vs laparoscopy. As surgeons use the robotic platform, clinical outcomes and operative times continue to improve, particularly in operations where extra articulation in confined spaces is required.