From transabdominal to totally extra-peritoneal robotic ventral hernia repair: observations and outcomes

PURPOSE: While robotic-assisted hernia repair has increased the popularity of minimally invasive hernia surgery, selecting between the types of approaches is a challenge for both experts and novices alike. In this study, we compared a single surgeon’s early experience transitioning from transabdominal hernia repair with sublay mesh in either the pre-peritoneal or retrorectus space (TA-SM) and enhanced-view totally extra-peritoneal (eTEP) ventral hernia repair in the peri-operative and long-term post-operative time periods. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 50 eTEP and 108 TA-SM procedures to collect demographics, intraoperative details, and 30-day and 1-year post-operative outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed utilizing Chi-square analysis, Fisher’s test, and two sample t-tests with equal variances. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in patient demographics or comorbidities. eTEP patients had larger defects (109.1 cm(2) vs. 31.8 cm(2), p = 0.043) and mesh used (432.8 cm(2) vs. 137.9 cm(2), p = 0.001). Operative times were equivalent (158.3 ± 90.6 min eTEP and 155.8 ± 65.2 min TA-SM, p = 0.84), but conversion to alternate procedure type was higher for the transabdominal approach (4% eTEP vs. 22% TA-SM, p < 0.05). Hospital stay was less in the eTEP cohort (1.3 days vs. 2.2 days, p < 0.05). Within 30 days, there were no significant differences in emergency visits or hospital readmissions. There was a greater propensity for eTEP patients to develop seromas (12.0% vs. 1.9%, p < 0.05). At 1 year, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrence rate (4.56% eTEP vs. 12.2% TA-SM, p = 0.28) respective to average time to recurrence (9.17 months eTEP vs. 11.05 months TA-SM). CONCLUSION: The eTEP approach can be adopted safely and efficiently, and may have superior peri-operative outcomes including fewer conversions and reduced hospital stay.