Minimally Invasive Repair of Recurrent Inguinal Hernia: Multi-Institutional Retrospective Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery

Introduction: Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in general surgery. Despite surgical advances, recurrence and chronic pain are still major issues after this intervention. Aim of our study was to retrospectively assess and compare outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic repair of recurrent inguinal hernia. Methods: All patients who underwent recurrent inguinal hernia repair between 2014 and 2021 in five different institutions were included in our study. Baseline data on age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, smoking habit, and anticoagulant therapy were retrospectively collected from prospectively maintained databases. Operative time, length of stay, and early and late complications were compared between the robotic and the laparoscopic approach. Results: Forty-eight patients underwent recurrent inguinal hernia repair between January 2014 and December 2021. Twenty-three patients underwent a robotic procedure, whereas 25 were submitted to the laparoscopic intervention. Overall mean follow-up was 26.2 months. There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics of the two groups. Acceptable and comparable rates of peri- and postoperative outcomes were recorded. However, postoperative visual analog scale score and incidence of chronic pain were lower after the robotic rather than after the laparoscopic approach. (2.9 versus 3.8 P = .002; 20% versus 0%; P = .02, respectively). Conclusions: Minimally invasive repair of recurrent inguinal hernia is safe and feasible; robotic surgery is associated with low rate of postoperative and chronic pain without a significant increase in operative time.