Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical outcomes and costs of retromuscular and intraperitoneal onlay mesh techniques in robotic incisional hernia repair

  • 2023 SAGES Oral
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and financial cost of intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) versus retromuscular (RM) repairs in robotic incisional hernia repairs (rIHR).

Methods

Patients who underwent either IPOM or RM elective rIHR from 2012 to 2022 were included. Demographics, operative details, postoperative outcomes, and hospital costs were directly compared.

Results

Sixty-nine IPOM and 55 RM were included. Age and body mass index (BMI) did not differ between both groups (IPOM vs RM: 59.3 ± 11.2 years vs. 57.5 ± 14 years, p = 0.423; BMI 34.1 ± 6.3 vs. BMI 33.2 ± 6.9, p = 0.435, respectively). Comorbidities and hernia characteristics were comparable. Extensive lysis of adhesions (> 30 min) was required more often in IPOM (18 vs. 6 in RM, p = 0.034). Defect closure was achieved in 100% of RM vs. 81.2% in IPOM (p < 0.001). Median (interquartile range) postoperative pain score was higher in RM than in IPOM [5(3–7) vs. 4(3–5), respectively, p = 0.006]. Median length of stay (0 day) and same-day discharge rate did not differ between groups (p = 0.598, p = 0.669, respectively). Six (8.7%) patients in the IPOM group versus one (1.8%) patient in the RM group were readmitted to hospital within 30 days postoperatively (p = 0.099). Perioperative complications were higher in IPOM (p = 0.011; 34.8% vs. 14.5% in RM) with higher Comprehensive Complication Index® morbidity scores [0(0–12.2) vs 0(0–0) in RM, p = 0.008)], Clavien–Dindo grade-II complications (8 vs 0 in RM, p = 0.009), and surgical site events (17 vs. 5 in RM, p = 0.024). Within a follow-up period of 57(± 28) months, recurrence rates were similar between both groups. Hospital costs did not differ between groups [IPOM: $9978 (7031–12,926) vs. RM: $8961(6701–11,222), p = 0.300]. Although postoperative complication costs were higher in IPOM ($2436 vs RM: $161, p = 0.020), total costs were comparable [IPOM: $12,415(8700–16,130) vs. RM: $9123(6789–11,457), p = 0.080].

Conclusion

Despite retromuscular repairs having lower postoperative complications than intraperitoneal onlay mesh repairs, both techniques offered encouraging results in robotic incisional hernia repair at a comparable total cost.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. 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(2):179–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-011-0879-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Tol MP, de Lange DC, Braaksma MM, 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. N Engl J Med 343(6):392–398. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200008103430603

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fink C, Baumann P, Wente MN, Knebel P, Bruckner T, Ulrich A, Werner J, Büchler MW, Diener MK (2013) Incisional hernia rate 3 years after midline laparotomy. Br J Surg 101(2):51–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Liang MK, Holihan JL, Itani K, Alawadi ZM, Gonzalez JR, Askenasy EP, Ballecer C, Chong HS, Goldblatt MI, Greenberg JA, Harvin JA, Keith JN, Martindale RG, Orenstein S, Richmond B, Roth JS, Szotek P, Towfigh S, Tsuda S, Vaziri K, Berger DH (2017) Ventral hernia management: expert consensus guided by systematic review. Ann Surg 265(1):80–89. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Walming S, Angenete E, Block M, Bock D, Gessler B, Haglind E (2017) Retrospective review of risk factors for surgical wound dehiscence and incisional hernia. BMC Surg 17(1):19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0207-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Shubinets V, Fox JP, Lanni MA, Tecce MG, Pauli EM, Hope WW, Kovach SJ, Fischer JP (2018) Incisional hernia in the United States: trends in hospital encounters and corresponding healthcare charges. Am Surg 84(1):118–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/000313481808400132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bittner R, Bain K, Bansal VK, Berrevoet F, Bingener-Casey J, Chen D, Chen J, Chowbey P, Dietz UA, de Beaux A, Ferzli G, Fortelny R, Hoffmann H, Iskander M, Ji Z, Jorgensen LN, Khullar R, Kirchhoff P, Kockerling F, Kukleta J, LeBlanc K, Li J, Lomanto D, Mayer F, Meytes V, Misra M, Morales-Conde S, Niebuhr H, Radvinsky D, Ramshaw B, Ranev D, Reinpold W, Sharma A, Schrittwieser R, Stechemesser B, Sutedja B, Tang J, Warren J, Weyhe D, Wiegering A, Woeste G, Yao Q (2019) Update of guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS))-part A. Surg Endosc 33(10):3069–3139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06907-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240(4):578–583. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000141193.08524.e7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. LeBlanc KA, Booth WV (1993) Laparoscopic repair of incisional abdominal hernias using expanded polytetrafluoroethylene: preliminary findings. Surg Laparosc Endosc 3(1):39–41

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sauerland S, Walgenbach M, Habermalz B, Seiler CM, Miserez M (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007781.pub2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Itani KM, Hur K, Kim LT, Anthony T, Berger DH, Reda D, Neumayer L (2010) Comparison of laparoscopic and open repair with mesh for the treatment of ventral incisional hernia: a randomized trial. Arch Surg 145(4):322–328. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2010.18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wassenaar EB, Schoenmaeckers EJ, Raymakers JT, Rakic S (2010) Subsequent abdominal surgery after laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair with an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh: a single institution experience with 72 reoperations. Hernia 14(2):137–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-009-0568-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosen MJ (2009) Polyester-based mesh for ventral hernia repair: is it safe? Am J Surg 197(3):353–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.11.003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kudsi OY, Bou-Ayash N, Gokcal F, Crawford AS, Chang K, Chung SK, Litwin D (2021) Learning curve of robotic rives-stoppa ventral hernia repair: a cumulative sum analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 31(7):756–764. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2020.0624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kudsi OY, Gokcal F, Bou-Ayash N, Crawford AS, Chung SK, Chang K, Litwin D (2020) Learning curve in robotic primary ventral hernia repair using intraperitoneal onlay mesh: a cumulative sum analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 31(3):346–355. https://doi.org/10.1097/sle.0000000000000885

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Muysoms FE, Miserez M, Berrevoet F, Campanelli G, Champault GG, Chelala E, Dietz UA, Eker HH, El Nakadi I, Hauters P, Hidalgo Pascual M, Hoeferlin A, Klinge U, Montgomery A, Simmermacher RK, Simons MP, Smietanski M, Sommeling C, Tollens T, Vierendeels T, Kingsnorth A (2009) Classification of primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias. Hernia 13(4):407–414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-009-0518-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Gokcal F, Morrison S, Kudsi OY (2019) Short-term comparison between preperitoneal and intraperitoneal onlay mesh placement in robotic ventral hernia repair. Hernia. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-01946-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, Puhan MA, Clavien PA (2013) The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity. Ann Surg 258(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318296c732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Petro CC, Novitsky YW (2016) Classification of hernias. In: Novitsky Y (ed) Hernia surgery. Springer, Cham, pp 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27470-6_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Childers CP, Dworsky JQ, Russell MM, Maggard-Gibbons M (2019) Comparison of cost center-specific vs hospital-wide cost-to-charge ratios for operating room services at various hospital types. JAMA Surg 154(6):557–558. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.0146

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. CoinNews Media Group (n.d.) US inflation calculator. https://www.usinflationcalculator.com. Accessed 2022

  23. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A (2007) G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 39(2):175–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Köckerling F, Lammers B, Weyhe D, Reinpold W, Zarras K, Adolf D, Riediger H, Krüger CM (2021) What is the outcome of the open IPOM versus sublay technique in the treatment of larger incisional hernias?: a propensity score-matched comparison of 9091 patients from the herniamed registry. Hernia 25(1):23–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02143-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bui NH, Jorgensen LN, Jensen KK (2022) Laparoscopic intraperitoneal versus enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal retromuscular mesh repair for ventral hernia: a retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 36(2):1500–1506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08436-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stoppa R, Petit J, Abourachid H, Henry X, Duclaye C, Monchaux G, Hillebrant JP (1973) Original procedure of groin hernia repair: interposition without fixation of Dacron tulle prosthesis by subperitoneal median approach. Chirurgie 99(2):119–123

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rives J, Lardennois B, Pire JC, Hibon J (1973) Large incisional hernias. The importance of flail abdomen and of subsequent respiratory disorders. Chirurgie 99(8):547–563

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Carbonell AM, Warren JA, Prabhu AS, Ballecer CD, Janczyk RJ, Herrera J, Huang LC, 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(2):210–217. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kudsi OY, Gokcal F, Chang K (2020) Robotic intraperitoneal onlay versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) retromuscular mesh ventral hernia repair: a propensity score matching analysis of short-term outcomes. Am J Surg 220(4):837–844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.01.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Prabhu AS (2020) RIP IPOM? Not so fast. Am J Surg 220(4):836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.06.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wassenaar EB, Raymakers JT, Rakic S (2007) Removal of transabdominal sutures for chronic pain after laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 17(6):514–516. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0b013e3181462b9e

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cheng H, Clymer JW, Po-Han Chen B, Sadeghirad B, Ferko NC, Cameron CG, Hinoul P (2018) Prolonged operative duration is associated with complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Surg Res 229:134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.03.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kudsi OY, Gokcal F, Bou-Ayash N, Crawford AS, Chang K, Chudner A, La Grange S (2022) Robotic ventral hernia repair: lessons learned from a 7-year experience. Ann Surg 275(1):9–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000004964

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Fuenmayor P, Lujan HJ, Plasencia G, Karmaker A, Mata W, Vecin N (2020) Robotic-assisted ventral and incisional hernia repair with hernia defect closure and intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) experience. J Robot Surg 14(5):695–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-019-01040-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Omar Yusef Kudsi

  2. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Georges Kaoukabani

  3. Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

    Naseem Bou-Ayash

  4. Good Samaritan Medical Center, Brockton, MA, USA

    Fahri Gokcal

Authors
  1. Omar Yusef Kudsi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Georges Kaoukabani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Naseem Bou-Ayash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fahri Gokcal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Omar Yusef Kudsi.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

Dr. Omar Yusef Kudsi has received teaching course, grant funding, and/or consultancy fees from Intuitive Surgical, Bard, and W.L. Gore outside the submitted work. Drs. Georges Kaoukabani, Naseem Bou-Ayash, and Fahri Gokcal have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Ethical approval

The database used for this study was approved by the Institutional Review Board.

Research involving human and animal participants

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kudsi, O.Y., Kaoukabani, G., Bou-Ayash, N. et al. Clinical outcomes and costs of retromuscular and intraperitoneal onlay mesh techniques in robotic incisional hernia repair. Surg Endosc (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10776-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10776-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation