Cargando…
Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial)
BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study is to compare the outcomes open PVHR and robotic PVHR. METHODS/DESIGN: The present study will be a randomized single-blinded controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis comparing robotic PVHR to open PVHR in adult patients undergoing elective PVHR...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186553/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32368702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.isjp.2020.03.004 |
_version_ | 1783526974982979584 |
---|---|
author | Douissard, Jonathan Meyer, Jeremy Dupuis, Arnaud Peloso, Andrea Mareschal, Julie Toso, Christian Hagen, Monika |
author_facet | Douissard, Jonathan Meyer, Jeremy Dupuis, Arnaud Peloso, Andrea Mareschal, Julie Toso, Christian Hagen, Monika |
author_sort | Douissard, Jonathan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study is to compare the outcomes open PVHR and robotic PVHR. METHODS/DESIGN: The present study will be a randomized single-blinded controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis comparing robotic PVHR to open PVHR in adult patients undergoing elective PVHR with a defect ranging between 1–5 cm. Patient refusing to participate, not able to give informed consent, with history of intra-abdominal surgery contraindicating a robotic surgical approach will be excluded. The intervention will consist in laparoscopic robotically assisted trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal epigastric or umbilical PVHR with closure of fascial defect and non-adsorbable mesh reinforcement. The control will be open pre-peritoneal epigastric or umbilical hernia repair with closure of fascial defect and non-absorbable mesh reinforcement. The primary outcome will be the incidence of wound-related complication within 1 month. The secondary outcomes will be esthetic satisfaction, pain, pain-killers consumption, general complications, costs, operative time and early hernia recurrence. DISCUSSION: Open PVHR is potentially associated to more wound-related complications, but has the advantages of cost-effectiveness, short operative time and totally extra-peritoneal repair. Laparoscopic PVHR has lower wound-related complications but implies placing the mesh in intra-peritoneal position, requires advanced laparoscopic skills, usually does not allow the closure of the defect, and can lead to excessive pain and pain-killers consumption. Robotic PVHR uses the same laparoscopic access as laparoscopic PVHR, but thanks to the extended range of motion given by the robotic system, allows defect closure, pre-peritoneal placement of the mesh and requires less technical skills. In the present randomized controlled trial, we expect to show that robotic PVHR leads to better wound-related outcomes than open PVHR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The present randomized controlled trial was registered into clinicaltrials.gov under registration number NCT04171921. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7186553 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71865532020-05-04 Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial) Douissard, Jonathan Meyer, Jeremy Dupuis, Arnaud Peloso, Andrea Mareschal, Julie Toso, Christian Hagen, Monika Int J Surg Protoc Research Paper BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study is to compare the outcomes open PVHR and robotic PVHR. METHODS/DESIGN: The present study will be a randomized single-blinded controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis comparing robotic PVHR to open PVHR in adult patients undergoing elective PVHR with a defect ranging between 1–5 cm. Patient refusing to participate, not able to give informed consent, with history of intra-abdominal surgery contraindicating a robotic surgical approach will be excluded. The intervention will consist in laparoscopic robotically assisted trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal epigastric or umbilical PVHR with closure of fascial defect and non-adsorbable mesh reinforcement. The control will be open pre-peritoneal epigastric or umbilical hernia repair with closure of fascial defect and non-absorbable mesh reinforcement. The primary outcome will be the incidence of wound-related complication within 1 month. The secondary outcomes will be esthetic satisfaction, pain, pain-killers consumption, general complications, costs, operative time and early hernia recurrence. DISCUSSION: Open PVHR is potentially associated to more wound-related complications, but has the advantages of cost-effectiveness, short operative time and totally extra-peritoneal repair. Laparoscopic PVHR has lower wound-related complications but implies placing the mesh in intra-peritoneal position, requires advanced laparoscopic skills, usually does not allow the closure of the defect, and can lead to excessive pain and pain-killers consumption. Robotic PVHR uses the same laparoscopic access as laparoscopic PVHR, but thanks to the extended range of motion given by the robotic system, allows defect closure, pre-peritoneal placement of the mesh and requires less technical skills. In the present randomized controlled trial, we expect to show that robotic PVHR leads to better wound-related outcomes than open PVHR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The present randomized controlled trial was registered into clinicaltrials.gov under registration number NCT04171921. Elsevier 2020-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7186553/ /pubmed/32368702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.isjp.2020.03.004 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Research Paper Douissard, Jonathan Meyer, Jeremy Dupuis, Arnaud Peloso, Andrea Mareschal, Julie Toso, Christian Hagen, Monika Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial) |
title | Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial) |
title_full | Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial) |
title_fullStr | Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial) |
title_full_unstemmed | Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial) |
title_short | Robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: A randomized controlled trial (Robovent Trial) |
title_sort | robotic versus open primary ventral hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial (robovent trial) |
topic | Research Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186553/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32368702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.isjp.2020.03.004 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT douissardjonathan roboticversusopenprimaryventralherniarepairarandomizedcontrolledtrialroboventtrial AT meyerjeremy roboticversusopenprimaryventralherniarepairarandomizedcontrolledtrialroboventtrial AT dupuisarnaud roboticversusopenprimaryventralherniarepairarandomizedcontrolledtrialroboventtrial AT pelosoandrea roboticversusopenprimaryventralherniarepairarandomizedcontrolledtrialroboventtrial AT mareschaljulie roboticversusopenprimaryventralherniarepairarandomizedcontrolledtrialroboventtrial AT tosochristian roboticversusopenprimaryventralherniarepairarandomizedcontrolledtrialroboventtrial AT hagenmonika roboticversusopenprimaryventralherniarepairarandomizedcontrolledtrialroboventtrial |