TP7.2.12 Robotic versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review. (28th October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Imsirovic, Anja; Bagga, Rahul; Khan, Mansoor; Singh, Krishna; Sains, Parv; Sajid, Muhammad S
• Is Part Of: British journal of surgery. Volume 108:Supplement 7(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-10-28
• Subjects: Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab362.058
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0007-1323

Abstract

Abstract: Aims: Robotic inguinal hernia repair (RIHR) is considered to improve surgical outcomes in patients undergoing inguinal hernia surgery. The objective is to present a systematic review of RIHR compared to laparoscopic repair (LIHR). Methods: A systematic review of comparative studies until January 2021 published on Embase, Medline, PubMed, PubMed Central and Cochrane databases reporting the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing RIHR versus LIHR was performed. Results: A total of 12565 patients in 10 comparative studies were included. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager, statistically the RIHR prolonged the duration of operation (Standardized mean difference (SMD), 3.33; z = 5.84; P = 0.00001) but the length of stay (SMD, -0.8; z = 0.66; P = 0.51) and post-operative pain score (SMD, -0.47; z = 1.19; P = 0.24) were similar in both groups. In addition, the recurrence rate was similar in both groups (p = 0.92). The incidence of post-operative complications (OR 1.67; 95% CI, 1.14, 2.45; z = 2.64; P = 0.008) and chronic groin pain (OR 2.14; 95% CI, 0.97, 4.72; z = 1.88; P = 0.06) was higher in RIHR group. Conclusion: RIHR is feasible and safe, but the duration of operation is significantly longer with equivocal other variables such as stay and pain score. There was higher incidence of post-operative morbidity and chronic groin pain as well. Major multi-center randomized controlled trial is mandatory to assess the long terms outcomes and cost effectiveness before the routine use of RIHR.