A direct comparison of robotic and laparoscopic hernia repair: patient-reported outcomes and cost analysis

Purpose: Hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgeries in the United States. Since the introduction of the Da Vinci robot, robot-assisted hernia repairs have become more common. In this study we aim to directly compare robotic and laparoscopic hernia repairs as well as explore potential cost differences. We hypothesize that robot-assisted hernia repairs are associated with better patient-reported outcomes. Methods: We conducted retrospective review to create a cohort study of 53 robotic (37 inguinal and 16 ventral) and 101 laparoscopic (68 inguinal and 33 ventral) hernia repairs. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS). Operative details were examined, and a cost analysis was performed. Results: Combining both hernia types together as well as looking at inguinal and ventral repairs separately, we found that there was no difference in hernia recurrence or 1-year CCS between robotic and laparoscopic hernia repair. For ventral hernia repairs alone, robotic procedure was associated with a decreased length of stay. We found that our robotic cases did have longer operative times and higher costs. The operative times did decrease to a length comparable to that of the laparoscopic cases as experience operating with the robot increased. Conclusion: In comparison to laparoscopic hernia repair, robotic hernia repair does not improve long-term patient-reported surgical outcomes. However, it does increase the cost of the operation and, in general, result in longer operative times.