Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 19, 2025
Application of a New Mesh Fixation Method in Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia Repair
Published on: December 23, 2022
Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled
Ramkumar Mohan1, Marcus Yeow1, Joel Yat Seng Wong1
1Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Purpose:
There has not been a consensus on the superiority of a surgical approach for minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to compare clinical, and patient-reported outcomes of robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (rVHR) to traditional endo-laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (lapVHR).
Methods:
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Scopus from inception to 16th March 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials and propensity score matched studies comparing rVHR to lapVHR. A meta-analysis was done for the outcomes of operative time, length of hospital stay, open conversion, recurrence, surgical site occurrence and cost.
Results:
A total of 5 studies (3732 patients) were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Significantly shorter operative times were reported with the lapVHR as compared to rVHR (weighted mean difference (WMD): 62.52, 95% CI: 50.84-74.19). There was also significantly less rates of open conversion with rVHR as compared to lapVHR (WMD: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.09-0.54). No significant differences in patient-reported outcomes that was discernible from the two papers that reported them.
Conclusion:
Overall, rVHR is comparable to lapVHR with longer operative times but less open conversion. It is, therefore, important to have proper patient selection to maximise the utility of rVHR.
