Robotic Intracorporeal Rectus Aponeuroplasty: Early Experience of a New Surgical Technique for Ventral Hernia Repair.

Introduction: The laparoscopic intracorporeal rectus aponeuroplasty (LIRA) was developed as an alternative for minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. This technique allows the closure of the defect and restoration of the midline without tension by plication of both aponeurosis of the abdominal rectus muscles combined with a minimally invasive intraperitoneal underlay mesh repair. The objective of this study is to report our early experience with the Robotic-LIRA (R-LIRA) technique and its safety and short-term efficacy. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing R-LIRA repair for ventral hernias from March 2019 to April 2022. Results: Eight patients underwent R-LIRA from March 2019 to April 2022. Median age was 47 years (interquartile range [IQR] 34.5-62.8). Median body mass index was 34.2 kg/m2 (IQR 29.9-35.2). Four patients (50%) had a primary ventral hernia being one M2, two M3, and one M2/M3. There were three incisional hernias, being one recurrent, 6 patients (75%) had associated diastasis of the rectus muscle and 1 patient presented pure diastasis. The median hernia width was 4 cm (IQR 2-6), and the median defect area was 16 cm2 (IQR 4-42). The median mesh area was 290 cm2 (IQR 211.2-300). In all cases, a barbed suture was also used for mesh fixation, and tackers were added in 4 cases. The median operative time was 172 minutes (IQR 139.8-293.3). The median length of stay was 0.5 days (IQR 0-1.8), and the median follow-up was 20 days (IQR 16-46). Conclusion: The R-LIRA has been shown to be safe and feasible for ventral and incisional hernia repairs with or without Diastasis of the Rectus Abdominis Muscle in the short term.

Social media as a tool for surgical education: a qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Social media use has exploded, attaining a significant influence within medicine. Previous studies have denoted the use of social media in various surgical specialties as a means to exchange professional ideas and improve the conference experience and at the same time, some have assessed its feasibility as a method of education. This systematic review aims to characterize the use of social media as a tool for general surgery education. METHODS: A systematic review of several databases from each database inception was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The JBI's critical appraisal tools were used to assess quality of the studies. RESULTS: A total of 861 articles were identified of which 222 were duplicates removed. The titles and abstracts from the remaining 639 abstracts were screened and 589 were excluded. The remaining 51 full articles were analyzed for eligibility, of which 24 met inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. These studies covered the general surgery specialty, of which 11 (n = 46%) focused on the laparoscopic surgical approach, 1 (n = 4%) on robotic-assisted surgical procedures, 1 (n = 4%) on both surgical approaches previously mentioned and 11 (n = 46%) on the general surgery specialty regardless of the surgical approach or technique. CONCLUSIONS: Advantages that SM offers should be considered, and content creators and institutions should help collectively to make sure that the content being published is evidence and guideline-based so its use it is taken to the maximum benefit.

Is Minimally Invasive Repair the New Gold Standard for Primary Unilateral Inguinal Hernias? Results of an International Survey of Surgeons.

Background: The Lichtenstein repair has long been heralded as the gold standard for unilateral primary inguinal hernias. However, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) repairs have gained popularity over the past decades given its advantages in recurrent, bilateral, and now even in primary inguinal hernias. We aim to further explore the perception of different techniques among surgeons internationally. Methods: A questionnaire was posted in three closed groups for surgeons and residents on Facebook® and surgical groups on WhatsApp®. It was also e-mailed to members of the following surgical societies: Mexican Society of Surgery, Brazilian Hernia Society, Asia Pacific Hernia Society, and European Hernia Society. Descriptive and basic comparative statistical analyses were performed. Results: In total, 874 surgeons answered the survey: 759 (86.9%) were male and 418 (47.8%) were from North America, 735 (84.1%) had completed training and 605 (69.2%) considered themselves hernia specialists. If safety profiles of inguinal herniorrhaphy were equal, 533 (61%) would choose MIS. Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal ranked first among preferred techniques if the cost of all techniques was the same. Safety of the procedure followed by experience of the surgeon is the most influential factors. Lastly, hernia specialists were more likely to choose an MIS technique (P < .0001). Conclusion: When an international sample of 874 attending and trainee surgeons were surveyed about what technique they would prefer to repair their own uncomplicated unilateral inguinal hernia, most chose MIS. Safety of the procedure and the surgeon's experience were the most important factors in choosing a surgical technique.

Endoscopic onlay repair for ventral hernia and rectus abdominis diastasis repair: Why so many different names for the same procedure? A qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A subcutaneous endoscopic onlay repair for ventral hernia with an anterior plication of diastasis recti (DR) has been published under different names in different countries. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the safety and feasibility of different named techniques with the same surgical concept. METHODS: The PRISMA guidelines were followed during all stages of this systematic review. The MINORS score system was used to perform qualitative assessment of all studies included in this review. Recommendations were then summarized for the following pre-defined key items: protocol, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, study designs, risk of bias, publication bias, heterogeneity, and statistical analysis. RESULTS: The systematic literature search found 2548 articles, 317 of which were duplicates and excluded from analysis. The titles and abstracts from the remaining 2231 articles were assessed. After careful evaluation, 2125 articles were determined to be unrelated to our study and subsequently excluded. The full text of the remaining 106 articles was thoroughly assessed. Case reports, editorials, letters to the editor, and general reviews were then excluded. A total of 13 articles were ultimately included for this review, describing a similar subcutaneous endoscopic approach for repair of concomitant ventral hernias and rectus diastasis defined under nine different named techniques on 716 patients. The number of patients in those studies varied from 10 to 201. The mean operative time varied from 68.5 to 195 min. The most common complication was seroma, followed by pain requiring intervention, hematoma, and surgical site infection. CONCLUSIONS: There are a few technique variations described in different studies, but with no significant differences in outcomes. We, therefore, propose to unify these procedures under one term, ENDoscopic Onlay Repair (ENDOR). This technique has shown to be effective and safe, with seroma being the most common complication.

Which Cholecystectomy Technique Would Surgeons Prefer on Themselves?

BACKGROUND: As the minimally invasive surgery revolution approaches 30 years, many techniques are now available for cholecystectomy: open, conventional laparoscopy, ini-laparoscopy, single incision, robotic, and natural orifice. Although much has been published about patient preferences regarding these techniques, less is known about surgeon perceptions and preferences. The aim of this study was to survey attending and trainee surgeons about which cholecystectomy technique they would prefer for themselves and what factors determine their decision. METHODS: Attending fellow and resident surgeons globally completed a Google Forms online questionnaire that was posted in 3 closed groups for surgeons on Facebook and WhatsApp. RESULTS: The online questionnaire was completed by 600 surgeons (453 attending surgeons and 147 residents/fellows). Most respondents were male individuals (87.6% of attending surgeons, 78.2% of trainee surgeons). The most common age range of respondents was 31 to 40 years. Surgeon response was global, with especially good representation from North American, Asian, and European physicians. When conventional laparoscopy, mini-laparoscopy, and robotic surgery were the options offered for cholecystectomy, 58.5% of trainees and 45.7% of surgeons chose conventional laparoscopy. When asked if they would consider a single-incision or natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery approach, 91.5% answered no. When asked which technique they would prefer if hypothetically all techniques were equally safe, about three-fourths chose either conventional laparoscopy (46%) or mini-laparoscopy (27%). When asked to rank which factors they considered most important in choosing a surgical technique, surgeon experience (52%) and safety of the procedure (45%) were the 2 most important factors. CONCLUSIONS: When an international sample of 600 attending and trainee surgeons were asked about undergoing a cholecystectomy on themselves, most chose either conventional laparoscopy or mini-laparoscopy as their preferred access technique. Single-incision and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery approaches were unpopular. Surgeons ranked the experience of the operating surgeon and safety of the procedure as the most important factors guiding their decision.