Literature DB >> 28646321

Early outcomes of robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair in obese patients: a multi-institutional, retrospective study.

Ramachandra Kolachalam1, Eugene Dickens2, Lawrence D'Amico3, Christopher Richardson4, Jorge Rabaza5, Reza Gamagami6, Anthony Gonzalez5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair (IHR) in general and particularly in obese patients has not been widely adopted, potentially due to the perceived technical challenges and the well-documented learning curve associated with laparoscopic repair. Outcomes in robotic-assisted IHR in obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) patients have not been described and warrant study.
METHODS: Seven surgeons conducted a multicenter retrospective chart review of their early robotic-assisted IHR (RHR) cases and compared them with their open IHR (OHR) cases. Demographics, operative characteristics, and perioperative morbidity were compared for unadjusted and propensity-matched populations.
RESULTS: 651 robotic-assisted cases and 593 open cases were collected. The outcomes of 148 RHRs to 113 OHRs in obese patients were compared. For obese populations-whether unadjusted (robotic-assisted, n = 148; open, n = 113) or matched (1:1) (robotic-assisted, n = 95; open, n = 93)-the robotic-assisted and open cohorts were comparable in terms of demographics and baseline characteristics. Significantly higher percentages of OHR patients experienced postoperative complications post-discharge (unadjusted: 11.5% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.005; and matched: 10.8% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.047). More concomitant procedures and bilateral repairs were conducted in obese RHR patients than in obese OHR patients (unadjusted 29.7% vs. 16.8%, p = 0.019; and unadjusted 35.1% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.0001-respectively). Prior laparoscopic IHR experience did not affect 30-day outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Obese patients who undergo RHR have a lower rate of postoperative complications compared to obese patients who undergo OHR. Previous laparoscopic IHR experience, more bilateral repairs, and more concomitant procedures were not associated with increased complications in RHR patients. These outcomes may facilitate increased adoption of minimally invasive IHR approaches in the obese population.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Da Vinci; Inguinal hernia repair; Laparoscopic; Minimally invasive surgery; Obesity; Robotic-assisted

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28646321     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-017-5665-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  14 in total

1.  Effect of body mass index on groin hernia surgery.

Authors:  Anders Rosemar; Ulf Angerås; Annika Rosengren; Pär Nordin
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 2.  Robotic inguinal hernia repair.

Authors:  Jose E Escobar Dominguez; Anthony Gonzalez; Charan Donkor
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 3.454

3.  Multicenter analysis comparing robotic, open, laparoscopic, and vaginal hysterectomies performed by high-volume surgeons for benign indications.

Authors:  Peter C Lim; John T Crane; Eric J English; Richard W Farnam; Devin M Garza; Marc L Winter; Jerry L Rozeboom
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 3.561

4.  Perioperative outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair.

Authors:  C Tadaki; D Lomelin; A Simorov; R Jones; M Humphreys; M daSilva; S Choudhury; V Shostrom; E Boilesen; V Kothari; D Oleynikov; M Goede
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 5.  Laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia repair: systematic review of effectiveness and economic evaluation.

Authors:  K McCormack; B Wake; J Perez; C Fraser; J Cook; E McIntosh; L Vale; A Grant
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.014

6.  Lichtenstein technique for inguinal hernia repair using polypropylene mesh fixed with sutures vs. self-fixating polypropylene mesh: a prospective randomized comparative study.

Authors:  G Chatzimavroudis; B Papaziogas; I Koutelidakis; I Galanis; S Atmatzidis; P Christopoulos; T Doulias; K Atmatzidis; J Makris
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 4.739

7.  UltraPro Hernia System, Prolene Hernia System and Lichtenstein for primary inguinal hernia repair: 3-year outcomes of a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  J Magnusson; J Nygren; U O Gustafsson; A Thorell
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 4.739

8.  Relationship between body mass index and the incidence of inguinal hernia repairs: a population-based study in Olmsted County, MN.

Authors:  B Zendejas; R Hernandez-Irizarry; T Ramirez; C M Lohse; B R Grossardt; D R Farley
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.739

9.  Risk factors for inguinal hernia in women: a case-control study. The Coala Trial Group.

Authors:  M S Liem; Y van der Graaf; R C Zwart; I Geurts; T J van Vroonhoven
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1997-11-01       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  Body mass index and groin hernia: a 34-year follow-up study in Swedish men.

Authors:  Anders Rosemar; Ulf Angerås; Annika Rosengren
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  12 in total

1.  Transition from Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair to Robotic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair.

Authors:  Tahir Koray Yozgatli; Eren Esen; Erman Aytac; Tayfun Karahasanoglu
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair is superior to open: a national database review.

Authors:  B Pokala; P R Armijo; L Flores; D Hennings; D Oleynikov
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2019-05-09       Impact factor: 4.739

3.  Robot-assisted abdominal wall surgery: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

Authors:  N A Henriksen; K K Jensen; F Muysoms
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2018-12-06       Impact factor: 4.739

4.  Comparison of BMI on operative time and complications of robotic inguinal hernia repair at a VA medical center.

Authors:  Justine Chinn; Rene Tellez; Bunchhin Huy; Cyrus Farzaneh; Ashton Christian; Jay Ramsay; Hubert Kim; Brian Smith; Marcelo W Hinojosa
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Robot-assisted groin hernia repair is primarily performed by specialized surgeons: a scoping review.

Authors:  Danni Lip Hansen; Anders Gram-Hanssen; Siv Fonnes; Jacob Rosenberg
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-07-05

Review 6.  Spin is present in the majority of articles evaluating robot-assisted groin hernia repair: a systematic review.

Authors:  Danni Lip Hansen; Siv Fonnes; Jacob Rosenberg
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Excess Body Weight and Abdominal Hernia.

Authors:  Ulrich A Dietz; Omar Yusef Kudsi; Fahri Gokcal; Naseem Bou-Ayash; Urs Pfefferkorn; Gottfried Rudofsky; Johannes Baur; Armin Wiegering
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2021-04-28

Review 8.  Current status and future perspectives of robotic inguinal hernia repair.

Authors:  Takuya Saito; Yasuyuki Fukami; Shintaro Kurahashi; Kohei Yasui; Tairin Uchino; Tatsuki Matsumura; Takaaki Osawa; Shunichiro Komatsu; Kenitiro Kaneko; Tsuyoshi Sano
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 2.540

9.  Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic hernia repair: real-world evidence from the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC).

Authors:  Melissa LaPinska; Kyle Kleppe; Lars Webb; Thomas G Stewart; Molly Olson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Comparison of perioperative outcomes between non-obese and obese patients undergoing robotic inguinal hernia repair: a propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  O Y Kudsi; N Bou-Ayash; F Gokcal
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 2.920

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.