Hsu, Justin L., Kelley, Jesse K., Zambito, Giuseppe M., Korakavi, Nisha, Phillips, Alexander, Phillips, Maxwell, Scheeres, David E., and Banks-Venegoni, Amy L.
Background: There is a paucity of data comparing open, robotic, and laparoscopic approaches on unilateral, non-recurrent inguinal hernias. Our study presents a large, retrospective triple-arm outcome analysis between robotic, laparoscopic, and open unilateral, non-recurrent inguinal hernia repairs at a single institution. Methods: 706 patients who underwent elective, non-recurrent inguinal hernia repair performed by 8 general surgeons at a single institution from 2016 to 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. Patient baseline characteristics, operative times, resident involvement, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed for all repair types. A cost analysis of the different procedures was performed. Results: There were 305 laparoscopic repairs, 207 robotic repairs, and 194 open repairs. Open and laparoscopic repairs were performed on patients who were older (p =<.001) and with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (p =<.001). Patient BMI was higher in minimally invasive repair than open repair (P =.021). There were no significant differences in complication rates on pairwise analysis. Robotic and open repairs had significantly longer operative times than laparoscopic repairs (P <.001). There was less resident involvement in robotic repair than with the other approaches (P <.001). Resident involvement was associated with shorter OR times (P =.001) and no significant difference in postoperative complications. There was a trend over the study period toward faster operative times and more robotic repair. Robotic repair is the most expensive repair, followed by laparoscopic and open repairs. Conclusion: All 3 repair techniques can be performed without significant differences in outcomes. The technique utilized should be based on surgeon preference and patient characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]