Robotic Primary and Revisional Hiatal Hernia Repair is Safe and Associated with Favorable Perioperative Outcomes: A Single Institution Experience.

Abstract

Background: Robotic hiatal hernia (HH) repair has been demonstrated to be feasible and safe. Recent conflicting reports have emerged on the higher incidence of perioperative complications with robotic HH repair when compared with laparoscopic repair. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of a prospective database at an academic medical center for all robotic HH repairs performed by a high-volume foregut surgeon from 2018 to 2021 was performed. Outcome measures included operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), conversion rate, need for esophageal lengthening procedure, intra- and perioperative complications, and 30-day in-hospital mortality. Results: One hundred four patients were included in the analysis. Fifteen percent of patients had a type I HH, 2% had a type II, 73% had a type III, and 10% had a type IV HH. Eighty-four percent of cases were primary and 16% were revisional. Fifty-four percent of patients had mesh placed and 4.4% had an esophageal lengthening procedure. Mean EBL was 15 mL and mean operative time was 151 minutes. Median LOS was 2 days (interquartile range 1-2 days). There were zero conversions. Intraoperative complication rate was 1% and 30-day complication rate was 4%. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was zero. Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis of 114 consecutive robotic HH repairs performed, with 83% type III or IV HHs and 16% revisional hiatal cases, our results demonstrate favorable perioperative outcomes, with lower EBL, shorter LOS, lower complication rate, zero conversions, and comparable operative times compared with historical laparoscopic data.