Skip to main content
Log in

Robot-assisted hiatal hernia repair demonstrates favorable short-term outcomes compared to laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

We postulated that the use of robotics may improve outcomes in hiatal hernia repair.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected Society of Thoracic Surgery database at a single institution of patients who underwent elective hiatal hernia repair from 2012 to 2017 using either laparoscopy or the da Vinci Xi robot. We compared patient characteristics and outcomes and then performed univariate and multivariate logistic regression modeling to determine the factors associated with postoperative morbidity.

Results

There were 293 consecutive patients who underwent elective hiatal hernia repair using either a laparoscopic (n = 151) or a robotic (n = 142) technique. There were no significant differences in age, gender, BMI, smoking history, presence of comorbidity, or hiatal hernia type. Seventy percent of the cases were a repair of either type III or type IV hiatal hernia. There were significantly higher ASA III and IV (7.9% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.03), higher Toupet fundoplication (83.4% vs. 44.4%, P < 0.001), and lower redo-repair (7.3% vs. 20.4%, P = 0.001) in the laparoscopic group compared to the robotic group. The hospital length of stay was significantly shorter (1.3 ± 1.8 vs. 1.8 ± 1.5 days, P = 0.003) and there were significantly lower rates of complications (6.3 vs. 19.2%, P = 0.001) after robotic compared to laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair. There was no difference in readmission rate and mortality. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that older age and laparoscopic technique were associated with higher complications after surgery.

Conclusion

The use of the Da Vinci Xi robot in our institution was associated with improved outcomes compared to laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair despite a higher incidence of re-operative cases in the robotic group. Thus, short-term outcomes of Da Vinci Xi robot-assisted hiatal hernia repair are not inferior to laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair. Further studies are needed to determine if Da Vinci Xi robot provides superior short-term and long-term outcome in treatment of symptomatic hiatal hernia.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Peters JH (2013) SAGES guidelines for the management of hiatal hernia. Surg Endosc 27:4407–4408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3212-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cuschieri A, Shimi S, Nathanson LK (1992) Laparoscopic reduction, crural repair, and fundoplication of large hiatal hernia. Am J Surg 163:425–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9610(92)90046-T

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Broeders IAMJ (2014) Robotics: the next step? Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 28:225–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpg.2013.12.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Matanes E, Lauterbach R, Boulus S, Amit A, Lowenstein L (2018) Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in gynecology: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 231:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.10.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ramirez D, Maurice MJ, Kaouk JH (2016) Robotic single-port surgery: paving the way for the future. Urology 95:5–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.05.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Autorino R, Zargar H, Kaouk JH (2014) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery: recent advances in urology. Fertil Steril 102:939–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.05.033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Musgrove KA, Hayanga JA, Holmes SD, Leung A, Abbas G (2018) Robotic versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery pulmonary segmentectomy: a cost analysis. Innov Technol Tech Cardiothorac Vasc Surg Publ. https://doi.org/10.1097/imi.0000000000000557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tian W, Fei Y (2018) Application of Da Vinci robotic surgery to hernia repair. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi Chin J Gastrointest Surg 21:740–743

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bittner JG, Alrefai S, Vy M, Mabe M, Del Prado PAR, Clingempeel NL (2018) Comparative analysis of open and robotic transversus abdominis release for ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 32:727–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5729-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hanly EJ, Talamini MA (2004) Robotic abdominal surgery. Am J Surg 188:19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2004.08.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Altieri MS, Yang J, Telem DA, Zhu J, Halbert C, Talamini M, Pryor AD (2016) Robotic approaches may offer benefit in colorectal procedures, more controversial in other areas: a review of 168,248 cases. Surg Endosc 30:925–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4327-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Brenkman HJF, Parry K, van Hillegersberg R, Ruurda JP (2016) Robot-assisted laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair: promising anatomical and functional results. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 26:465–469. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2016.0065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mertens AC, Tolboom RC, Zavrtanik H, Draaisma WA, Broeders IAMJ (2018) Morbidity and mortality in complex robot-assisted hiatal hernia surgery: 7-year experience in a high-volume center. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6494-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sarkaria IS, Latif MJ, Bianco VJ, Bains MS, Rusch VW, Jones DR, Rizk NP (2017) Early operative outcomes and learning curve of robotic assisted giant paraesophageal hernia repair. Int J Med Robot 13:e1730. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Galvani CA, Loebl H, Osuchukwu O, Samamé J, Apel ME, Ghaderi I (2016) Robotic-assisted paraesophageal hernia repair: initial experience at a single institution. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 26:290–295. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2016.0096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. FDA Approves New Robotic Surgery Device. In: ScienceDaily. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/07/000717072719.htm. Accessed 10 Nov 2018

  17. Villamere J, Gebhart A, Vu S, Nguyen NT (2015) Utilization and outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic general and bariatric surgical procedures at academic medical centers. Surg Endosc 29:1729–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3886-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gehrig T, Mehrabi A, Fischer L, Kenngott H, Hinz U, Gutt CN, Müller-Stich BP (2013) Robotic-assisted paraesophageal hernia repair—a case–control study. Langenbecks Arch Surg 398:691–696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-012-0982-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tolboom RC, Draaisma WA, Broeders IAMJ (2016) Evaluation of conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic redo hiatal hernia and antireflux surgery: a cohort study. J Robot Surg 10:33–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0558-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Toro JP, Lin E, Patel AD (2015) Review of robotics in foregut and bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc 29:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3646-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Patel MN, Hemal AK (2017) Does advancing technology improve outcomes? Comparison of the da Vinci standard/S/Si to the Xi robotic platforms during robotic nephroureterectomy. J Endourol 32:133–138. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Morelli L, Di Franco G, Lorenzoni V, Guadagni S, Palmeri M, Furbetta N, Gianardi D, Bianchini M, Caprili G, Mosca F, Turchetti G, Cuschieri A (2018) Structured cost analysis of robotic TME resection for rectal cancer: a comparison between the da Vinci Si and Xi in a single surgeon’s experience. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6465-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Min P. Kim.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

Dr. Chan reports financial activities outside the submitted work from Olympus, Boston Scientific, Ethicon, and Veran. Dr. Kim reports financial activities outside the submitted work from Olympus, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Veran, and Intuitive Surgical. Drs. Soliman, Nguyen, Chihara, Meisenbach, and Graviss have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Soliman, B.G., Nguyen, D.T., Chan, E.Y. et al. Robot-assisted hiatal hernia repair demonstrates favorable short-term outcomes compared to laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 34, 2495–2502 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07055-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07055-8

Keywords

Navigation