Systematic review of robotic ventral hernia repair with meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundDespite being one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons, there is a lack of consensus regarding the recommended approach for ventral hernia repair (VHR). Recent times have seen the rapid development of new techniques, such as robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR). This systematic review and meta‐analysis aims to evaluate the currently available evidence relating to RVHR, in comparison to open VHR (OVHR) and laparoscopic VHR (LVHR).MethodsA systematic search of the following databases was conducted: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science. A meta‐analysis was performed for the outcomes of length of stay (LOS), recurrence, operative time, intraoperative complications, wound complications, 30‐day readmission, 30‐day reoperation, mortality and costs.ResultsA total of 39 studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, RVHR reduced LOS, intra‐operative complications, wound complications and readmission compared to OVHR. Compared to LVHR, RVHR was associated with increased operative time and costs, with comparable clinical outcomes.ConclusionThere is currently a lack of robust evidence to support the robotic approach in VHR. It does not demonstrate major benefits in comparison to LVHR, which is more affordable and accessible. Strong quality, long‐term data is required to help with establishing a gold standard approach in VHR.