TY - JOUR
T1 - Systematic review of robotic ventral hernia repair with meta-analysis
AU - Tran, Elisa
AU - Sun, Jing
AU - Gundara, Justin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors. ANZ Journal of Surgery published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.
PY - 2024/2/27
Y1 - 2024/2/27
N2 - Background: Despite being one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons, there is a lack of consensus regarding the recommended approach for ventral hernia repair (VHR). Recent times have seen the rapid development of new techniques, such as robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the currently available evidence relating to RVHR, in comparison to open VHR (OVHR) and laparoscopic VHR (LVHR). Methods: A systematic search of the following databases was conducted: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science. A meta-analysis was performed for the outcomes of length of stay (LOS), recurrence, operative time, intraoperative complications, wound complications, 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation, mortality and costs. Results: A total of 39 studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, RVHR reduced LOS, intra-operative complications, wound complications and readmission compared to OVHR. Compared to LVHR, RVHR was associated with increased operative time and costs, with comparable clinical outcomes. Conclusion: There is currently a lack of robust evidence to support the robotic approach in VHR. It does not demonstrate major benefits in comparison to LVHR, which is more affordable and accessible. Strong quality, long-term data is required to help with establishing a gold standard approach in VHR.
AB - Background: Despite being one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons, there is a lack of consensus regarding the recommended approach for ventral hernia repair (VHR). Recent times have seen the rapid development of new techniques, such as robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the currently available evidence relating to RVHR, in comparison to open VHR (OVHR) and laparoscopic VHR (LVHR). Methods: A systematic search of the following databases was conducted: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science. A meta-analysis was performed for the outcomes of length of stay (LOS), recurrence, operative time, intraoperative complications, wound complications, 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation, mortality and costs. Results: A total of 39 studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, RVHR reduced LOS, intra-operative complications, wound complications and readmission compared to OVHR. Compared to LVHR, RVHR was associated with increased operative time and costs, with comparable clinical outcomes. Conclusion: There is currently a lack of robust evidence to support the robotic approach in VHR. It does not demonstrate major benefits in comparison to LVHR, which is more affordable and accessible. Strong quality, long-term data is required to help with establishing a gold standard approach in VHR.
KW - robotic surgery
KW - ventral hernia repair
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85179304138&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85179304138&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/ans.18822
DO - 10.1111/ans.18822
M3 - Review article
C2 - 38087977
AN - SCOPUS:85179304138
SN - 1445-1433
VL - 94
SP - 37
EP - 46
JO - ANZ Journal of Surgery
JF - ANZ Journal of Surgery
IS - 1-2
ER -