Zaman J, Teixeira L, Patel PB, Ridler G, Ata A, Singh TP. From transabdominal to totally extra-peritoneal robotic ventral hernia repair: observations and outcomes.
Hernia 2023;
27:635-643. [PMID:
36973467 PMCID:
PMC10042403 DOI:
10.1007/s10029-023-02767-2]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2022] [Accepted: 03/02/2023] [Indexed: 03/29/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE
While robotic-assisted hernia repair has increased the popularity of minimally invasive hernia surgery, selecting between the types of approaches is a challenge for both experts and novices alike. In this study, we compared a single surgeon's early experience transitioning from transabdominal hernia repair with sublay mesh in either the pre-peritoneal or retrorectus space (TA-SM) and enhanced-view totally extra-peritoneal (eTEP) ventral hernia repair in the peri-operative and long-term post-operative time periods.
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective review of 50 eTEP and 108 TA-SM procedures to collect demographics, intraoperative details, and 30-day and 1-year post-operative outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed utilizing Chi-square analysis, Fisher's test, and two sample t-tests with equal variances.
RESULTS
There were no significant differences in patient demographics or comorbidities. eTEP patients had larger defects (109.1 cm2 vs. 31.8 cm2, p = 0.043) and mesh used (432.8 cm2 vs. 137.9 cm2, p = 0.001). Operative times were equivalent (158.3 ± 90.6 min eTEP and 155.8 ± 65.2 min TA-SM, p = 0.84), but conversion to alternate procedure type was higher for the transabdominal approach (4% eTEP vs. 22% TA-SM, p < 0.05). Hospital stay was less in the eTEP cohort (1.3 days vs. 2.2 days, p < 0.05). Within 30 days, there were no significant differences in emergency visits or hospital readmissions. There was a greater propensity for eTEP patients to develop seromas (12.0% vs. 1.9%, p < 0.05). At 1 year, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrence rate (4.56% eTEP vs. 12.2% TA-SM, p = 0.28) respective to average time to recurrence (9.17 months eTEP vs. 11.05 months TA-SM).
CONCLUSION
The eTEP approach can be adopted safely and efficiently, and may have superior peri-operative outcomes including fewer conversions and reduced hospital stay.
Collapse