medigraphic.com
ISSN 1665-2576 (Print)

2020, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Cir Endoscop 2020; 21 (2)

Robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair: report of 98 cases performed in Mexico

Kuri OJA, Luján MKI, Galeana NFI, Solorzano AJJ, Aguirre GMP

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 66-70
PDF size: 149.99 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To describe the experience with the preperitoneal transabdominal approach (TAPP) and modified Stoppa approach, both executed by the same surgical team and assisted by robot, as well as to demonstrate the advantages of the robotic approach. Material and methods: A prospective, descriptive, observational and longitudinal study of patients who underwent surgery with the r-TAPP and modified r-Stoppa techniques, for unilateral and bilateral inguinal hernias, respectively, was conducted during the period between January 2016 and August 2020, at the Hospital Ángeles Pedregal and ABC Santa Fe hospital in Mexico City. The clinical characteristics, the surgical technique and its results were analyzed. Results: 98 patients were included, 35 women (35.71%) and 63 men (64.28%). The median age was 52.3 years. The approximate docking time was 4 minutes. Seventy-three patients presented unilateral inguinal hernia (74.48%), the r-TAPP technique was performed, the mean surgical time was 46.3 minutes. Twenty-five patients presented bilateral inguinal hernia (25.51%), a modified r-Stoppa technique was performed, the mean surgical time was 72.3 minutes. In the postoperative follow-up, the only complication that has occurred is an umbilical wound seroma. So far, no patient has relapsed. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted surgery has progressively changed surgical procedures. The r-TAPP and modified r-Stoppa techniques are, in the short term, reproducible, safe and effective techniques for patients with unilateral and bilateral inguinal hernias. This series is the largest reported so far in México, carried out by a single surgical team.


REFERENCES

  1. Podolsky D, Novitsky Y. Robotic inguinal hernia repair. Surg Clin N Am. 2020; 100: 409-415.

  2. Tam V, Rogers DE, Al-Abbas A, Borrebach J, Dunn SA, Zureikat AH et al. Robotic inguinal hernia repair: a large health system's experience with the first 300 cases and review of the literature. J Surg Res. 2019; 235: 98-104.

  3. Iraniha A, Peloquin J. Long-term quality of life and outcomes following robotic assisted TAPP inguinal hernia repair. J Robot Surg. 2018; 12: 261-269.

  4. Kakiashvili E, Bez M, Abu Shakra I, Ganam S, Bickel A, Merei F et al. Robotic inguinal hernia repair: Is it a new era in the management of inguinal hernia? Asian J Surg. 2021; 44: 93-98.

  5. Gamagami R, Dickens E, Gonzalez A, D'Amico L, Richardson C, Rabaza J et al. Open versus robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal (R-TAPP) inguinal hernia repair: a multicenter matched analysis of clinical outcomes. Hernia. 2018; 22: 827-836.

  6. Aiolfi A, Cavalli M, Micheletto G, Bruni PG, Lombardo F, Perali C et al. Robotic inguinal hernia repair: is technology taking over? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Hernia. 2019; 23: 509-519.

  7. Kudsi OY, McCarty JC, Paluvoi N, Mabardy AS. Transition from laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair to robotic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a retrospective review of a single surgeon's experience. World J Surg. 2017; 41: 2251-2257.

  8. Barbash GI, Glied SA. New technology and health care costs--the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363: 701-714.

  9. Pradarelli JC, Thornton JP, Dimick JB. Who is responsible for the safe introduction of new surgical technology?: an important legal precedent from the da vinci surgical system trials. JAMA Surg. 2017; 152: 717-718.

  10. Escobar DJE, Gonzalez A, Donkor C. Robotic inguinal hernia repair. J Surg Oncol. 2015; 112: 310-314.

  11. Arcerito M, Changchien E, Bernal O, Konkoly-Thege A, Moon J. Robotic inguinal hernia repair: technique and early experience. Am Surg. 2016; 82: 1014-1017.

  12. Escobar DJE, Ramos MG, Seetharamaiah R, Donkor C, Rabaza J, González A. Feasibility of robotic inguinal hernia repair, a single institution experience. Surg Endosc. 2016; 30: 4042-4048.

  13. Waite KE, Herman MA, Doyle PJ. Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair. J Robot Surg. 2016; 10: 239-244.

  14. Claus C, Furtado M, Malcher F, Cavazzola LT, Felix E. Ten golden rules for a safe MIS inguinal hernia repair using a new anatomical concept as a guide. Surg Endosc. 2020; 34: 1458-1464. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07449-z.

  15. Kolachalam R, Dickens E, D'Amico L, Richardson C, Rabaza J, Gamagami R et al. Early outcomes of robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair in obese patients: a multi-institutional, retrospective study. Surg Endosc. 2018; 32: 229-235. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5665-z.

  16. Wu JJ, Way JA, Eslick GD, Cox MR. Transabdominal pre-peritoneal versus open repair for primary unilateral inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis. World J Surg. 2018; 42: 1304-1311.

  17. Charles EJ, Mehaffey JH, Tache-Leon CA, Hallowell PT, Sawyer RG, Yang Z. Inguinal hernia repair: is there a benefit to using the robot? Surg Endosc. 2018; 32: 2131-2136.

  18. Ito F, Jarrard D, Gould JC. Transabdominal preperitoneal robotic inguinal hernia repair. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2008; 18: 397–399.

  19. Cetrulo LN, Harmon J, Ortiz J, Canter D, Joshi AR. Case report of a robotic-assisted laparoscopic repair of a giant incarcerated recurrent inguinal hernia containing bladder and ureters. Int J Med Robot. 2015; 11 (1): 15–17.

  20. Abdelmoaty WF, Dunst CM, Neighorn C, Swanstrom LL, Hammill CW. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a comprehensive cost analysis. Surg Endosc. 2019; 33: 3436-3443. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-06606-9.

  21. Henriksen NA, Jensen KK, Muysoms F. Robot-assisted abdominal wall surgery: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Hernia. 2019; 23: 17-27. doi: 10.1007/s10029-018-1872-3.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com