• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • MIS Fellows Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search the SAGES Site
    • Guidelines Search
    • Video Search
    • Search Images
    • Search Abstracts
  • OWLS/FLS
  • Login
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Robotic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: The Learning Curve Is Steep

Robotic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: The Learning Curve Is Steep

Jeffrey R Watkins, MD, Houssam G Osman, MD, Ernest L Dunn, MD, Rohan Jeyarajah, MD. Methodist Dallas Medical Center

Introduction: We aim to describe the transition from laparoscopy to robotic paraesophageal hernia repair by comparing outcomes of pre- and post-robotic implementation. While the transition from open surgery to laparascopy is well-documented in the literature, very little has been published regarding the transition from laparoscopy to robotic-assisted paraesophageal hernia repair.

Methods and procedures: We reviewed 19 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic paraesophageal repair with placement of mesh over a one-year period prior to the introduction of robotic surgery. We then compared these to 11 consecutive patients over a 9-month period who underwent robotic-assisted paraesophageal repairs. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon. Techniques were identical with resection of sac, crural repair, keyhole mesh placement, Dor fundoplication, and gastrostomy tube placement as pexy. Patient charts were reviewed and all relevant data were extracted and evaluated with appropriate statistical analysis performed.

Results: The operative time for robotic surgery was significantly greater than our laparoscopic procedures with an average of 254 minutes versus 186 minutes respectively (p < 0.001). There were four robotic cases that were converted to an open procedure compared with no conversions in our laparoscopic group (p = .01). The length of stay in the robotic procedures was longer – 4.5 days as compared to 3.3 days in the laparoscopic patients (p = 0.10). All hernias were classified as large type III hernias in the laparoscopic group while 8 out of the 9 hernias in the robotic group were classified as such (p = 0.32). Average age, BMI, presence of volvulus, previous hiatal surgery and complications did not differ significantly between the two patient populations.

Conclusions: The transition from laparoscopy to robotics in paraesophageal hernia repair can be a difficult process within the initial period. Caution must be taken as one transitions from laparoscopy to robotics with a clear understanding that there is a steep learning curve for robotic paraesophageal hernia repairs.

311


  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2025 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons