"Comparative safety and efficacy of robotic TAPP and IPOM techniques in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Short-term Outcomes".
Ahmed Abdelsamad, Ibrahim Khalil, Khaled Ashraf Mohamed, Aya Sayed Ahmed Said Serour, Mohammed Khaled Mohammed, Noureldin Mostafa, Youssef Osama Badie, Zeyad M Wesh, Alaeldin Mohamedsami Mohamedosman Ali, Florian Gebauer
{"title":"\"Comparative safety and efficacy of robotic TAPP and IPOM techniques in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Short-term Outcomes\".","authors":"Ahmed Abdelsamad, Ibrahim Khalil, Khaled Ashraf Mohamed, Aya Sayed Ahmed Said Serour, Mohammed Khaled Mohammed, Noureldin Mostafa, Youssef Osama Badie, Zeyad M Wesh, Alaeldin Mohamedsami Mohamedosman Ali, Florian Gebauer","doi":"10.1007/s10029-025-03454-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair has gained popularity for its enhanced precision and visualization. Two main approaches-r-IPOM and r-TAPP-differ in technique and risk profiles. r-IPOM/+ is technically simpler and preferred for larger defects, but may increase seroma and bowel-related complications. Conversely, r-TAPP employs extraperitoneal mesh positioning, potentially reducing postoperative complications. This meta-analysis aimed to compare perioperative outcomes between r-IPOM and r-TAPP, focusing on seroma, surgical site infection (SSI), and hernia defect closure. Secondary outcomes included recurrence, reoperation, operative time, and hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic meta-analysis, including 11 studies and 1001 patients, was performed. Pooled event rates and mean differences were calculated using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses based on mesh type and meta-regression assessing the impact of defect closure on complication rates were conducted. Evidence certainty was evaluated using the GRADE approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both approaches achieved high defect closure rates (r-IPOM+: 98%, r-TAPP: 99%; p = 0.9). Seroma and hematoma rates were low without significant differences; however, r-IPOM showed a slightly higher trend. r-TAPP demonstrated a significantly lower Surgical site infection (SSI) rate (1%) compared to (r-IPOM 4%, p = 0.02), although these complications themselves did not differ significantly between groups, indicating a possible but unconfirmed association. Recurrence, reoperation, operative time, and hospital stay were comparable. Meta-regression indicated a non-significant trend toward fewer complications with higher closure rates (p = 0.09). The GRADE assessment rated the certainty of evidence as high across all outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both r-TAPP and r-IPOM are effective and safe for robotic ventral hernia repair. A significant inverse correlation between closure rates and complication rates underscores the importance of complete, tension-free closure. While perioperative outcomes are largely comparable, r-TAPP may reduce infection risk likely due to lower seroma and hematoma rates. Approach selection should be guided by patient factors, anatomical considerations, and surgical expertise.</p>","PeriodicalId":13168,"journal":{"name":"Hernia","volume":"29 1","pages":"255"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12364986/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hernia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-025-03454-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair has gained popularity for its enhanced precision and visualization. Two main approaches-r-IPOM and r-TAPP-differ in technique and risk profiles. r-IPOM/+ is technically simpler and preferred for larger defects, but may increase seroma and bowel-related complications. Conversely, r-TAPP employs extraperitoneal mesh positioning, potentially reducing postoperative complications. This meta-analysis aimed to compare perioperative outcomes between r-IPOM and r-TAPP, focusing on seroma, surgical site infection (SSI), and hernia defect closure. Secondary outcomes included recurrence, reoperation, operative time, and hospital stay.
Methods: A systematic meta-analysis, including 11 studies and 1001 patients, was performed. Pooled event rates and mean differences were calculated using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses based on mesh type and meta-regression assessing the impact of defect closure on complication rates were conducted. Evidence certainty was evaluated using the GRADE approach.
Results: Both approaches achieved high defect closure rates (r-IPOM+: 98%, r-TAPP: 99%; p = 0.9). Seroma and hematoma rates were low without significant differences; however, r-IPOM showed a slightly higher trend. r-TAPP demonstrated a significantly lower Surgical site infection (SSI) rate (1%) compared to (r-IPOM 4%, p = 0.02), although these complications themselves did not differ significantly between groups, indicating a possible but unconfirmed association. Recurrence, reoperation, operative time, and hospital stay were comparable. Meta-regression indicated a non-significant trend toward fewer complications with higher closure rates (p = 0.09). The GRADE assessment rated the certainty of evidence as high across all outcomes.
Conclusion: Both r-TAPP and r-IPOM are effective and safe for robotic ventral hernia repair. A significant inverse correlation between closure rates and complication rates underscores the importance of complete, tension-free closure. While perioperative outcomes are largely comparable, r-TAPP may reduce infection risk likely due to lower seroma and hematoma rates. Approach selection should be guided by patient factors, anatomical considerations, and surgical expertise.
期刊介绍:
Hernia was founded in 1997 by Jean P. Chevrel with the purpose of promoting clinical studies and basic research as they apply to groin hernias and the abdominal wall . Since that time, a true revolution in the field of hernia studies has transformed the field from a ”simple” disease to one that is very specialized. While the majority of surgeries for primary inguinal and abdominal wall hernia are performed in hospitals worldwide, complex situations such as multi recurrences, complications, abdominal wall reconstructions and others are being studied and treated in specialist centers. As a result, major institutions and societies are creating specific parameters and criteria to better address the complexities of hernia surgery.
Hernia is a journal written by surgeons who have made abdominal wall surgery their specific field of interest, but we will consider publishing content from any surgeon who wishes to improve the science of this field. The Journal aims to ensure that hernia surgery is safer and easier for surgeons as well as patients, and provides a forum to all surgeons in the exchange of new ideas, results, and important research that is the basis of professional activity.