• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • COVID-19 Annoucements
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Who is SAGES?
    • SAGES Mission Statement
    • Advocacy
    • Strategic Plan, 2020-2023
    • Committees
      • Request to Join a SAGES Committee
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Full Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Donate to the SAGES Foundation
    • Awards
      • George Berci Award
      • Pioneer in Surgical Endoscopy
      • Excellence In Clinical Care
      • International Ambassador
      • IRCAD Visiting Fellowship
      • Social Justice and Health Equity
      • Excellence in Community Surgery
      • Distinguished Service
      • Early Career Researcher
      • Researcher in Training
      • Jeff Ponsky Master Educator
      • Excellence in Medical Leadership
      • Barbara Berci Memorial Award
      • Brandeis Scholarship
      • Advocacy Summit
      • RAFT Annual Meeting Abstract Contest and Awards
  • Meetings
    • NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2023 Scientific Session Call For Abstracts
      • 2023 Emerging Technology Call For Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • Industry
      • Advertising Opportunities
      • Exhibit Opportunities
      • Sponsorship Opportunities
    • Future Meetings
    • Past Meetings
      • SAGES 2022
      • SAGES 2021
    • Related Meetings Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Applications
      • Active Membership
      • Affiliate Membership
      • Associate Active Membership
      • Candidate Membership
      • International Membership
      • Medical Student Membership
    • Member News
      • Member Spotlight
      • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find a SAGES Member
  • Publications
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • SCOPE – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Annoucements
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • OpiVoid.org
    • SAGES.TV Video Library
    • Safe Cholecystectomy Program
      • Safe Cholecystectomy Didactic Modules
    • Masters Program
      • SAGES Facebook Program Collaboratives
      • Acute Care Surgery
      • Bariatric
      • Biliary
      • Colorectal
      • Flexible Endoscopy (upper or lower)
      • Foregut
      • Hernia
      • Robotics
    • Educational Opportunities
    • HPB/Solid Organ Program
    • Courses for Residents
      • Advanced Courses
      • Basic Courses
    • Video Based Assessments (VBA)
    • Robotics Fellows Course
    • MIS Fellows Course
    • Facebook Livestreams
    • Free Webinars For Residents
    • SMART Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video
    • SAGES at Cine-Med
      • SAGES Top 21 MIS Procedures
      • SAGES Pearls
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
      • SAGES Tips & Tricks of the Top 21
  • Opportunities
    • NEW-Area of Concentrated Training Seal (ACT)-Advanced Flexible Endoscopy-Coming Soon!
    • SAGES Fellowship Certification for Advanced GI MIS and Comprehensive Flexible Endoscopy
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • SAGES Research Opportunities
    • Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery
    • Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery
    • Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy
    • Job Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
  • Store
    • “Unofficial” Logo Products
  • Log In

Robotic-Assisted Abdominal Wall Hernia Repair Does not Decrease Peri-operative Pain When Compared to Laparoscopic Repair

Maureen D Moore, MD, Katherine D Gray, MD, Suraj Panjwani, MBBS, Aaron Burshtein, Joshua Burshtein, Thomas J Fahey III, Gregory Dakin, MD, Alfons Pomp, MD, Cheguevara Afaneh, MD, Rasa Zarnegar, MD. New York Presbyterian Hospital-Weill Cornell Medical Center

INTRODUCTION: When compared to open abdominal ventral hernia repair, laparoscopic repair results in decreased pain and complication rates. We aimed to determine the perioperative pain scores and outcomes when comparing robotic-assisted abdominal wall hernia repair with fascial closure to traditional laparoscopic-assisted approach with open fascial closure.

METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 173 consecutive patients who underwent primary laparoscopic-assisted ventral hernia repair (LVHR), primary robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (RVHR), laparoscopic-assisted incisional hernia repair (LIHR) or robotic-assisted incisional hernia repair (RIHR) between 2014-2016. Both primary repair of the defect as well as placement of an underlay mesh was performed. Robotic-assisted hernia repairs involve robotically suturing the mesh in place, while the laparoscopic approach involves tacking the mesh in place. Patient characteristics, operative details, post-operative complications, post-operative pain scores and medication requirements were collected and analyzed. Primary end points were cumulative opioid use at 6, 12, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-operatively and pain scores recorded in six-hour intervals up to 18 hours post-operatively. Secondary end-points were post-operative complications and length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS: Patient demographics and clinical characteristics in the laparoscopic (n = 89) versus robotic groups (n = 84) were comparable except for Charlson Index (p=0.04) (Table 1). The mean operative time was shorter in primary LVHR versus primary RVHR (68 ± 21 mins vs. 107 ± 29 mins; respectively p=<0.0001), however there was no statistical difference when comparing LIHR versus RIHR. There were no significant differences in EBL, conversion rates and post-operative complication rates among groups. LIHR had significantly smaller hernia defect sizes (p=0.04) but used larger mesh sizes when compared to RIHR (P=<0.001). The LVHR group had a shorter LOS (p=0.03). The LIHR group had significantly lower pain scores throughout the first 6 hours post-operatively (p=0.03). There was a significant difference in opioid use between LVHR vs. RVHR (p=0.001) and LIHR vs. RIHR (p=0.005) from 6-12 hours postoperatively. Cumulatively, patients in the LIHR group required less opioids than RIHR (p=0.02). There was no significant difference in pain scores at any time point among the groups after 6 hours postoperatively (p > 0.05) (Table 2).

CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair with mesh is a safe and feasible approach; however, laparoscopic ventral hernia repair may confer less early post-operative pain with resultant decreased opioid use especially after an incisional hernia repair.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 80381

Program Number: P001

Presentation Session: Poster of Distinction (Non CME)

Presentation Type: PDIST

160

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • WhatsApp
  • Reddit

Related

« Return to SAGES 2017 abstract archive

Our Mission

Innovate, educate and collaborate to improve patient care.

Recently, on SAGES…

Critical View of Safety (CVS) Challenge QR Code

The SAGES Critical View of Safety Challenge – Donate Your Lap Chole Videos!

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons is hosting the first Artificial Intelligence Data Challenge conducted by surgeons. The aim of this challenge is to generate a large and diverse dataset of laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos, annotated with respect to the subcomponents of the Critical View of Safety (CVS). Computer scientists from all over the […]

Respuesta de SAGES al Estudio NordICC sobre el beneficio de las colonoscopias de detección

SAGES desea aclarar los resultados del estudio NordICC y colocarlos en contexto de los esfuerzos de varias agencias nacionales para reducir el riesgo de cáncer colorrectal – la segunda causa de muerte por cáncer más frecuente en los Estados Unidos-, mediante la promoción de la detección y tratamiento oportuno de las lesiones.

SAGES Response to NordICC Study Regarding Benefit of Screening Colonoscopies

The NordICC Study recently published in The New England Journal of Medicine and widely reported on by media outlets has raised questions regarding the benefit of screening colonoscopy in lowering the risk of colorectal cancer and cancer-related deaths among otherwise healthy and symptom-free men and women aged 55 to 64. Provocative headlines and commentaries have […]

Contact SAGES

Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons
11300 W. Olympic Blvd Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064 USA
webmaster@sages.org
Tel: (310) 437-0544

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Important Links

SAGES 2023 Meeting Information

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

 

  • taTME Study Info
  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2023 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons