Evaluation of robot-assisted laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair in children.

Abstract

Laparoscopic approach is the gold standard for repairing hiatal hernia (HH). Robotic technology is now widely accepted, but it is rarely used in children with HH. Our aim was to evaluate the clinical effect of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) in the treatment of HH in children. A retrospective study was carried out in patients undergoing elective robot-assisted laparoscopic or conventional laparoscopic HH repair at a tertiary academic hospital from January 2020 to December 2022, and patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in this study. We compared the characteristics and clinical results of patients to understand the effects of the two surgical methods. Forty-six patients (CLS, group 1, n = 25; RALS, group 2, n = 21) met the inclusion criteria. All operations were performed by one experienced pediatric surgeon. In this study, no significant differences were found in terms of gender, age, weight, size of HH, total operation times, the effective operation time (excluding setup time) and complications between group 1 and group 2. (P = 0.979, P = 0.438, P = 0.265, P = 0.800, P = 0.122, P = 0.427 and P = 0.478, respectively). However, the intraoperative bleeding, the intensive care unit (ICU) admission, postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS) and postoperative fasting time were significantly less for RALS (P = 0.016, P = 0.040, P = 0.035 and P = 0.025, respectively). Meanwhile, the overall charges were significantly higher in group 2 (P < 0.01). Despite higher charges for robotic-assisted HH repair, it is a safe and reliable alternative to CLS and was associated with better outcomes in children.