IMPORTANCE Despite rapid adoption of the robotic platform for inguinal hernia repair in the US, to date, no level I trials have ever compared robotic inguinal hernia repair to laparoscopic repair. This multicenter randomized clinical trial is the first to compare the robotic platform to laparoscopic approach for minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair.OBJECTIVE To determine whether the robotic approach to inguinal hernia repair results in improved postoperative outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis multicenter, single-blinded, prospective randomized clinical pilot study was conducted from April 2016 to April 2019, with a follow-up duration of 30 days in 6 academic and academic-affiliated sites. Enrolled in this study were 113 patients with a unilateral primary or recurrent inguinal hernia. After exclusions 102 remained for analysis.INTERVENTIONS Standard laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair or robotic transabdominal preperitoneal repair. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESMain outcomes included postoperative pain, health-related quality of life, mobility, wound morbidity, and cosmesis. Secondary outcomes included cost, surgeon ergonomics, and surgeon mental workload. A primary outcome was not selected because this study was designed as a pilot study. The hypothesis was formulated prior to data collection.RESULTS A total of 102 patients were included in the study (54 in the laparoscopic group, mean [SD] age, 57.2 [13.3] years and 48 [88.9%] male; 48 in the robotic group, mean [SD] age, 56.1 [14.1] years and 44 [91.6%] male). There were no differences at the preoperative, 1-week, or 30-day points between the groups in terms of wound events, readmissions, pain as measured by the Visual Analog Scale, or quality of life as measured by the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. Compared with traditional laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, robotic transabdominal preperitoneal repair was associated with longer median (interquartile range) operative times (75.5 [59.0-93.8] minutes vs 40.5 [29.2-63.8] minutes, respectively; P < .001), higher median (interquartile range

Endoscopic thyroidectomy by a cervical approach is a feasible procedure. As in conventional thyroid surgery, great care should be exercised when dissecting the recurrent laryngeal nerve.

With less shrinkage, fewer and less dense adhesions to the viscera, and significantly stronger abdominal wall adherence and tissue ingrowth at 28 days in this animal study, PCO was superior to both Proceed and PPM in all categories. Furthermore, PCO demonstrated all the favorable qualities needed in an optimal prosthesis for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, including the rapid development of a neoperitoneum.

For this specific cohort of patients undergoing curative laparoscopic colectomies for invasive colon adenocarcinoma, the mean follow-up was > 5 years. Overall survival and disease-free survival for stage I, II, and III colon cancer as well as for stages I-III combined are favorable and comparable to historically acceptable open colectomy survival rates. Overall survival and disease-free survival after laparoscopic colectomy for invasive colon cancer is no worse, and perhaps better than, the previously reported rates for the same procedure done by an open technique.

No abstract