BN SO36 - Robotic versus laparoscopic giant hiatus hernia repair - is one superior in clinical outcomes?

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background The number of robotic giant hiatal hernia repair (RGHHR) procedures is steadily increasing. RGHHR offers several potential advantages over traditional laparoscopy, including enhanced visualisation, superior ergonomics, and the use of articulating instruments, which can be particularly beneficial in the restrictive operating field of the diaphragmatic hiatus. However, the outcomes of RGHHR remain heterogeneous, both when reported alone and in comparison to laparoscopic giant hiatus hernia repair (LGHHR). This study aims to evaluate and compare the key clinical outcomes of RGHHR and LGHHR in adult patients. Method All patients undergoing primary giant hiatus hernia (GHH) surgery between March 2019 and March 2024 at a tertiary institution and a five surgeon upper GI service. Retrospective review of electronic records were utilised to document: patient demographics, hernia type, operative details. Use of mesh and gastropexy (as proxy measures to indicate difficulty of operation). Follow-up duration in weeks. Open cases within this cohort were excluded. Outcomes were: length of stay (LOS), 30-day morbidity measured using Clavien-Dindo (CD) grading, RTT and 30-day mortality. Analysis was undertaken using un-paired t-test and Chi2. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Table 1. Patients LGHHR RGHHR p n 56 29 Age (median) 71 (31-93) 66 (39-85) 0.1303 Female (%) 68.7 70 0.8988 BMI 31.8 (±6.4) 29.9 (±3.4) 0.1715 ASA grade (average) 2.4 2.2 0.0587 Hernia Types (median) 3 3 0.4411 Median follow-up (weeks) 8 (1-161) 12 (3-172) 0.5763 Table 2. Operative details LGHHR RGHHR p Mesh used (%) 9.1 0 0.0907 Gastropexy (%) 12.7 6.9 0.4175 Table 3. Outcomes LGHHR RGHHR p LOS (median) 1 (0-161) 2 (0-15) 0.4177 30-day morbidity (CD≥3, %) 3.6 6.9 0.9193 RTT (%) 9.1 6.9 0.5570 30-day mortality 0 0 NA Conclusion RGHHR approach has been successful in managing complex GHH, with low RTT, low co-morbidity and no mortality. In our institution RGHHR has demonstrated non-inferiority to LGHHR in respect to clinical outcomes. Patient factors and hernia types did not affect case selection. Use of mesh and gastropexy showed no difference in outcomes between the two groups. Cost, operative time and surgeon strain/fatigue were not evaluated in this study, however, these would provide useful additional comparative markers for the future.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.