Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ten-year trends in minimally invasive hernia repair: a NSQIP database review

  • 2020 SAGES Oral
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Utilization of minimally invasive techniques for ventral and inguinal hernia repairs continues to rise. The purpose of this study was to provide updates on national utilization trends and wound complications of minimally invasive versus open ventral and inguinal hernia repairs.

Methods

Data were accessed from the 2006 to 2017 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. All CPT codes that correlated to laparoscopic and open inguinal and ventral hernia repairs were queried. The total number of cases and wound complications, including superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep SSI, organ space SSI, and wound dehiscence, was collected for each respective CPT code and compared for each year. IBM SPSS Statistics Software and Microsoft Excel were used to collect and analyze the data.

Results

Between 2009 and 2017, the percentage of minimally invasive inguinal hernia repairs increased from 23.1 to 37.8%, whereas the percentage of minimally invasive ventral hernias only increased from 31.5 to 36.6%. Open inguinal hernia repairs had a wound complication rate ranging from 0.60 to 0.74%, which was double the rate of minimally invasive repairs (0.24 to 0.49%) for nearly each respective year. Minimally invasive ventral hernia repairs had total wound complication rates ranging from 0.91 to 1.37%, whereas open ventral hernias had the highest total wound complication rates ranging from 5.07 to 6.26%.

Conclusions

Over the last ten years, the utilization of minimally invasive inguinal and ventral hernia repair has increased by nearly two-fold. A larger proportion of this increase has been secondary to minimally invasive inguinal compared to ventral hernia repairs. Wound complications across all techniques remained stable or improved, and remained significantly less in the minimally invasive compared to open approaches. This study highlights the continued growth of minimally invasive techniques in hernia repair over the last decade.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. AlMarzooqi R, Tish S, Huang L-C, Prabhu A, Rosen M (2019) Review of inguinal hernia repair techniques within the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative. Hernia 23:429–438

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D, Beck W, Holzman MD (2012) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 16:179–183

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. The HerniaSurge Group (2018) International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22:1–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. SAGES Guidelines Committee, Earle D, Roth JS, Saber A, Haggerty S, Bradley JF, Fanelli R, Price R, Richardson WS, Stefanidis D (2016) SAGES guidelines for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. SurgEndosc 30:3163–3183

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vu JV, Gunaseelan V, Krapohl GL, Englesbe MJ, Campbell DA, Dimick JB, Telem DA (2018) Surgeon utilization of minimally invasive techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a population-based study. Surg Endosc

  6. Tran H, Tran K, Turingan I, Zajkowska M, Lam V, Hawthorne W (2015) Single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorraphy with telescopic extraperitoneal dissection: technical aspects and potential benefits. Hernia 19:407–416

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Tschuor C, Metzger J, Clavien P-A, Vonlanthen R, Lehmann K (2015) Inguinal hernia repair in Switzerland. Hernia 19:741–745

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sheetz KH, Claflin J, Dimick JB (2020) Trends in the adoption of robotic surgery for common surgical procedures. JAMA Netw Open 3:e1918911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Petro CC, Zolin S, Krpata D, Alkhatib H, Tu C, Rosen MJ, Prabhu AS (2020) Patient-Reported Outcomes of Robotic vs Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair With Intraperitoneal Mesh: The PROVE-IT Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surg.

  10. Alkhatib H, Tastaldi L, Krpata DM, Petro CC, Huang L-C, Phillips S, Fafaj A, Rosenblatt S, Rosen MJ, Prabhu AS (2019) Impact of modifiable comorbidities on 30-day wound morbidity after open incisional hernia repair. Surgery 166:94–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Al Chalabi H, Larkin J, Mehigan B, McCormick P (2015) A systematic review of laparoscopic versus open abdominal incisional hernia repair, with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Surg 20:65–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Haskins IN, Horne CM, Krpata DM, Prabhu AS, Tastaldi L, Perez AJ, Rosenblatt S, Poulose BK, Rosen MJ (2018) A call for standardization of wound events reporting following ventral hernia repair. Hernia 22:729–736

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Willoughby AD, Lim RB, Lustik MB (2017) Open versus laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repairs: defining the ideal BMI to reduce complications. SurgEndosc 31:206–214

    Google Scholar 

  14. Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, de Lange DC, Braaksma MM, IJzermans JN, Boelhouwer RU, de Vries BC, Salu MK, Wereldsma JC, Bruijninckx CM, Jeekel J (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. New Engl J Med 343:392–398

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Cox TC, Blair LJ, Huntington CR, Colavita PD, Prasad T, Lincourt AE, Heniford BT, Augenstein VA (2016) The cost of preventable comorbidities on wound complications in open ventral hernia repair. J Surg Res 206:214–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vossler JD, Pavlosky KK, Murayama SM, Moucharite MA, Murayama KM, Mikami DJ (2019) Predictors of robotic versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. J Surg Res 241:247–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Armijo P, Pratap A, Wang Y, Shostrom V, Oleynikov D (2018) Robotic ventral hernia repair is not superior to laparoscopic: a national database review. SurgEndosc 32:1834–1839

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bullen NL, Massey LH, Antoniou SA, Smart NJ, Fortelny RH (2019) Open versus laparoscopic mesh repair of primary unilateral uncomplicated inguinal hernia: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Hernia 23:461–472

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Scheuermann U, Niebisch S, Lyros O, Jansen-Winkeln B, Gockel I (2017) TransabdominalPreperitoneal (TAPP) versus Lichtenstein operation for primary inguinal hernia repair – A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Surg 17:55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pisanu A, Podda M, Saba A, Porceddu G, Uccheddu A (2015) Meta-analysis and review of prospective randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and Lichtenstein techniques in recurrent inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 19:355–366

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Prabhu AS, Carbonell A, Hope W, Warren J, Higgins R, Jacob B, Blatnik J, Haskins I, Alkhatib H, Tastaldi L, Fafaj A, Tu C, Rosen MJ (2020) Robotic inguinal vs transabdominal laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: the RIVAL randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg 155:380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pokala B, Armijo PR, Flores L, Hennings D, Oleynikov D (2019) Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair is superior to open: a national database review. Hernia 23:593–599

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. LeBlanc K, Dickens E, Gonzalez A, Gamagami R, Pierce R, Balentine C, Voeller G (2020) Prospective, multicenter, pairwise analysis of robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair with open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: early results from the Prospective Hernia Study. Hernia

  25. Walker PA, May AC, Mo J, Cherla DV, Santillan MR, Kim S, Ryan H, Shah SK, Wilson EB, Tsuda S (2018) Multicenter review of robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: is there a role for robotics? SurgEndosc 32:1901–1905

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bower C, Roth JS (2013) Economics of abdominal wall reconstruction. SurgClin North Am 93:1241–1253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Funk LM, Perry KA, Narula VK, Mikami DJ, Melvin WS (2013) Current national practice patterns for inpatient management of ventral abdominal wall hernia in the United States. SurgEndosc 27:4104–4112

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tsui C, Klein R, Garabrant M (2013) Minimally invasive surgery: national trends in adoption and future directions for hospital strategy. SurgEndosc 27:2253–2257

    Google Scholar 

  29. Arita NA, Nguyen MT, Nguyen DH, Berger RL, Lew DF, Suliburk JT, Askenasy EP, Kao LS, Liang MK (2015) Laparoscopic repair reduces incidence of surgical site infections for all ventral hernias. SurgEndosc 29:1769–1780

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kaoutzanis C, Leichtle SW, Mouawad NJ, Welch KB, Lampman RM, Wahl WL, Cleary RK (2015) Risk factors for postoperative wound infections and prolonged hospitalization after ventral/incisional hernia repair. Hernia 19:113–123

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Schlosser KA, Arnold MR, Otero J, Prasad T, Lincourt A, Colavita PD, Kercher KW, Heniford BT, Augenstein VA (2019) Deciding on optimal approach for ventral hernia repair: laparoscopic or open. J Am College Surg 228:54–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Savitch SL, Shah PC (2016) Closing the gap between the laparoscopic and open approaches to abdominal wall hernia repair: a trend and outcomes analysis of the ACS-NSQIP database. SurgEndosc 30:3267–3278

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pechman DM, Cao L, Fong C, Thodiyil P, Surick B (2018) Laparoscopic versus open emergent ventral hernia repair: utilization and outcomes analysis using the ACSNSQIP database. SurgEndosc 32:4999–5005

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Martin-del-Campo LA, Weltz AS, Belyansky I, Novitsky YW (2018) Comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes of robotic versus open transversusabdominis release. SurgEndosc 32:840–845

    Google Scholar 

  35. Bittner JG, Alrefai S, Vy M, Mabe M, Del Prado PAR, Clingempeel NL (2018) Comparative analysis of open and robotic transversusabdominis release for ventral hernia repair. SurgEndosc 32:727–734

    Google Scholar 

  36. Carbonell AM, Warren JA, Prabhu AS, Ballecer CD, Janczyk RJ, Herrera J, Huang L-C, Phillips S, Rosen MJ, Poulose BK (2018) Reducing length of stay using a robotic-assisted approach for retromuscular ventral hernia repair: a comparative analysis from the americas hernia society quality collaborative. Ann Surg 267:210–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 W Watertown Plank Rd, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, 53226, USA

    Matthew Madion, Matthew I. Goldblatt, Jon C. Gould & Rana M. Higgins

Authors
  1. Matthew Madion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew I. Goldblatt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jon C. Gould
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rana M. Higgins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rana M. Higgins.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Dr. Matthew Madion has no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose. Dr. Matthew I Goldblatt is a speaker and consultant for W.L. Gore; undergoes speaking, consulting, and research for Medtronic; is a consultant for Allergan; and does research for Bard. Dr. Jon C Gould is a consultant for Torax/Ethicon and a consultant for W.L. Gore. Dr. Rana M Higgins is a proctor for Intuitive Surgical and is a speaker for W.L. Gore.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Madion, M., Goldblatt, M.I., Gould, J.C. et al. Ten-year trends in minimally invasive hernia repair: a NSQIP database review. Surg Endosc 35, 7200–7208 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-08217-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-08217-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation