Robotic vs. Open Approach for Older Adults Undergoing Retromuscular Ventral Hernia Repair.

OBJECTIVE

To describe 30-day outcomes including post-operative complications, readmissions, and quality of life score changes for older adults undergoing elective ventral hernia repair with retromuscular mesh placement and to compare rates of these outcomes for individuals undergoing robotic versus open approaches.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Over one third of patients presenting for elective ventral hernia repair are over the age of 65 and many have complex surgical histories that warrant intricate hernia repairs. Robotic ventral hernia repairs have gained increasing popularity in the US and in some studies have demonstrated decreased rates of postoperative complications, and less pain resulting in shorter hospital stays. However, the robotic approach has several downsides including prolonged operative times as well as the use of pneumo-peritoneum which may be risky in older patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data in a national hernia specific registry (the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative) and identified patients over the age of 65 undergoing either an open or robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair. After propensity score matching adjusting for demographic, clinical, and hernia related factors, logistic regression was used to compare 30-day complications, readmission, and quality of life (QoL) scores as captured by the HerQLes scale for patients undergoing each approach.

RESULTS

Of 2128 patients who met inclusion criteria, 1695 (79.7%) underwent open ventral hernia repair while 433 (20.3%) underwent robotic repair. After propensity score matching, there were 350 robotic cases and 759 open cases for analysis. Patients undergoing robotic repairs demonstrated significantly shorter length of stays (1 vs 4 days, P < 0.01) and had equivalent odds of both 30-day post-operative complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.15 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.44) and readmission (OR 1.09 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.6) compared to the open approach. QoL scores were similar between groups at 30 days but were slightly better for robotic patients at 1 year (92 vs 84 P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic ventral hernia repair is an option for appropriately selected older patients undergoing retromuscular ventral hernia repair, demonstrating shorter hospital stays and equivalent rates of complications and readmissions in the post-operative period. However, more data is needed regarding QoL outcomes and long-term function, especially as it relates to recurrence rates, between the two approaches.