Comparative perioperative and 5-year outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic or open inguinal hernia repair: a study of 153,727 patients in the state of New York
Objective This study aimed to examine the perioperative outcomes of robotic inguinal hernia repair as compared to the open and laparoscopic approaches utilizing large-scale population-level data. Methods This study was funded by the SAGES Robotic Surgery Research Grant (2019). The New York Statewide...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical endoscopy 2021-12, Vol.35 (12), p.7209-7218 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective
This study aimed to examine the perioperative outcomes of robotic inguinal hernia repair as compared to the open and laparoscopic approaches utilizing large-scale population-level data.
Methods
This study was funded by the SAGES Robotic Surgery Research Grant (2019). The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative database was used to identify all adult patients undergoing initial open (O-IHR), laparoscopic (L-IHR), and robotic (R-IHR) inguinal hernia repair between 2010 and 2016. Perioperative outcome measures [complications, length of stay (LOS), 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, 30-day readmissions] and estimated 1/3/5-year recurrence incidences were compared. Propensity score (PS) analysis was used to estimate marginal differences between R-IHR and L-IHR or O-IHR, using a 1:1 matching algorithm.
Results
During the study period, a total of 153,727 patients underwent inguinal hernia repair (117,603 [76.5%] O-IHR, 35,565 [23.1%] L-IHR; 559 [0.36%] R-IHR) in New York state. Initial univariate analysis found R-IHR to have longer LOS (1.74 days vs. 0.66 O-IHR vs 0.19 L-IHR) and higher rates of overall complications (9.3% vs. 3.6% O-IHR vs 1.1% L-IHR), 30-day ED visits (11.6% vs. 6.1% O-IHR vs. 4.9% L-IHR), and 30-day readmissions (5.6% vs. 2.4% O-IHR vs. 1.2% L-IHR) (
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0930-2794 1432-2218 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00464-020-08211-1 |