ROBOTIC HERNIORRAPHY IN THE PEDIATRIC POPULATION: AN INTEGRATIVE REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
PDF (Português (Brasil))

Keywords

Herniorrhaphy, Robotic, Pediatric, Surgery.

How to Cite

Lima, A. V. D. S., Aranão, J. P. C., Batista, L. C. V. de, Germani, G. B., Silva, T. R. da, Corrêa, N. de G., Silva, N. L. da, Bonamin, N. L., Cremonez, C. Z., França, G. V., Silva , P. H. N., & Fernandes, N. C. (2024). ROBOTIC HERNIORRAPHY IN THE PEDIATRIC POPULATION: AN INTEGRATIVE REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. Brazilian Journal of Implantology and Health Sciences, 6(7), 1536–1554. https://doi.org/10.36557/2674-8169.2024v6n7p1536-1554

Abstract

Robotic herniorrhaphy in children represents a significant advancement in pediatric surgery, offering notable clinical benefits such as reduced tissue trauma, increased surgical precision, and faster postoperative recovery. These advancements are particularly important in pediatric patients, whose bodies are in phases of growth and development, making it crucial to minimize surgical trauma and optimize recovery. Although the initial cost of acquiring and maintaining robotic systems is high, the long-term benefits may justify this investment. Robotic systems, such as the da Vinci, have an initial cost that can range between 1.5 and 2 million dollars, in addition to annual maintenance costs that can reach 200 thousand dollars. These costs are substantially higher than those associated with conventional laparoscopic and open techniques. However, the long-term clinical and economic benefits, such as reduced postoperative complication rates, decreased need for reoperations, and faster recovery, can offset the high initial costs. From a technical standpoint, the correct setup of the robotic system, proper patient positioning, and the use of specific instrumentation are crucial factors for the procedure's success. The precise configuration of the robotic system involves calibrating the instruments and verifying functionality before the surgery begins. Patient positioning, typically in a supine position with a slight Trendelenburg tilt, allows better access to the surgical area and exposure of internal organs. The instrumentation used, including precision graspers and specific suturing devices, is inserted through small ports and remotely controlled by the surgeon from the console. The three-dimensional vision provided by the robotic system allows for precise and safe tissue dissection, reducing the risk of inadvertent damage. Economically, the cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic surgery is complex. Studies indicate that despite the high initial costs, robotic surgery may be more cost-effective than conventional techniques due to better clinical outcomes and faster recovery. The reduction in hospital stay and postoperative complications can result in significant long-term healthcare cost savings. The clinical benefits of robotic surgery include reduced tissue trauma, which translates to less postoperative pain and faster recovery. These factors can lead to lower indirect costs, such as reduced productivity loss for parents caring for their children and lower costs for analgesic medications. The increased precision and better visualization provided by robotic surgery can also reduce the incidence of intraoperative complications and the need for additional treatments, contributing to a favorable cost-benefit ratio. Moreover, robotic surgery offers ergonomic advantages for surgeons, reducing fatigue and improving the precision of movements. The surgical console allows the surgeon to operate in a comfortable position, using intuitive controls to manipulate the robotic instruments, which is particularly relevant in complex and long-duration procedures.

https://doi.org/10.36557/2674-8169.2024v6n7p1536-1554
PDF (Português (Brasil))

References

BERGER, A. C. et al. Pediatric Robotic Surgery: A Retrospective Review of Short-Term Outcomes. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 52, n. 1, p. 78-82, 2017.

BISGAARD, T. et al. Techniques of Inguinal Hernia Repair in Children: A Comparative Study. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 46, n. 6, p. 1072-1077, 2011.

CLARK, A. J. Epidemiology of Pediatric Inguinal Hernia. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 52, n. 6, p. 1018-1025, 2017.

CUNDY, T. P. et al. Laparoscopic Versus Open Inguinal Hernia Repair in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 29, n. 4, p. 317-326, 2013.

DUNCAN, A. A. et al. Abdominal Hernias in Children: Incidence and Management. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 36, n. 8, p. 899-905, 2020.

GEFEN, Z. et al. Direct and Indirect Inguinal Hernias in Pediatric Population. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 35, n. 7, p. 675-681, 2019.

GRAHAM, D. et al. Complications of Inguinal Hernia in Children. American Journal of Surgery, v. 212, n. 4, p. 747-752, 2016.

GOMES, M. P. et al. Outcomes of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Hernia Repair in Pediatric Patients: A Comparative Study. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 53, n. 6, p. 1076-1080, 2018.

HOLLAND, A. J. et al. Evolution of Pediatric Robotic Surgery: A Review of the Current State and Future Directions. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 34, n. 9, p. 955-962, 2018.

HUANG, Y. et al. Economic and Training Considerations in Pediatric Robotic Surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, v. 34, n. 2, p. 652-659, 2020.

KIM, S. S. et al. Comparative Outcomes of Robotic vs Laparoscopic Pediatric Urological Surgery. Journal of Pediatric Urology, v. 15, n. 2, p. 123-130, 2019.

KUMAR, A. et al. Complications of Pediatric Robotic Hernia Repair: A Review of Current Literature. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 34, n. 3, p. 243-249, 2018.

LEE, S. Y. et al. Long-Term Outcomes of Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 55, n. 4, p. 743-750, 2020.

LEE, S. Y. et al. Training Challenges in Pediatric Robotic Surgery: A Systematic Review. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 52, n. 6, p. 915-922, 2017.

LUNDSTRÖM, P. et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 30, n. 6, p. 615-622, 2014.

MERRITT, N. H. et al. Expansion of Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Urology: Safety and Feasibility in an Increasingly Complex Patient Population. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 51, n. 6, p. 1004-1008, 2016.

METZELDER, M. L. et al. Efficacy of Robotic-Assisted Hernia Repair in Pediatric Surgery: Comparative Analysis. Journal of Pediatric Urology, v. 13, n. 5, p. 457-462, 2017.

PIERRO, A. et al. Long-Term Follow-Up After Pediatric Robotic Hernia Repair: A Retrospective Study. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 37, n. 1, p. 23-30, 2021.

RANDALL, C. L. et al. Economic Evaluation of Robotic Surgery Compared to Conventional Laparoscopy in Pediatric Surgery. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 53, n. 2, p. 243-248, 2018.

RAMAN, J. D. et al. Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery in Pediatric Urology: Emerging Applications and Outcomes. Journal of Endourology, v. 26, n. 3, p. 316-321, 2012.

REDDY, P. P. et al. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Urology: A Comparative Study. Journal of Urology, v. 198, n. 3, p. 789-795, 2017.

SCHIER, F. Laparoscopic and Robotic Techniques in Pediatric Urology. European Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 26, n. 3, p. 194-202, 2016.

SCHIER, F. Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair – A Prospective Personal Series of 542 Children. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, v. 41, n. 6, p. 1081-1084, 2006.

SCHIER, F., KOONTZ, C. S., PARSONS, C. M. Current Trends in Pediatric Laparoscopic Hernia Repair. Surgical Endoscopy, v. 26, n. 4, p. 1031-1036, 2012.

SU, Z. T. et al. Financial Impact of Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Patients: A Multi-Center Study. Journal of Pediatric Urology, v. 15, n. 2, p. 134-140, 2019.

WILLIAMS, R. F. et al. Inguinal Hernia Repair in Pediatric Patients: Comparison of Laparoscopic Versus Open Techniques. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques, v. 24, n. 3, p. 183-187, 2014.

ZHANG, Y. et al. Short-Term Outcomes of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair in Children: A Meta-Analysis. Pediatric Surgery International, v. 35, n. 9, p. 975-982, 2019.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2024 Ana Vitória Da Silva Lima, João Pedro Cardoso Aranão, Luana Cristhine Vega de Batista, Gabriela Bachega Germani, Thaís Ruiz da Silva, Natália de Goes Corrêa, Natália Lopes da Silva, Natielly Luiza Bonamin, Caroline Zaninelli Cremonez, Gabriela Vendramini França, Pamela Helen Noronha Silva , Nathalia Coelho Fernandes