Perioperative safety profile of robotic versus laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 1Department of General Surgery, Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China
- 2Department of General Surgery, Huantai County People's Hospital, Zibo, Shandong, China
Abstract
Background: Robotic hiatal hernia repair (RHHR) is increasingly used, but whether its technical advantages improve perioperative safety compared with laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (LHHR) remains uncertain. We compared the short-term safety profiles of RHHR and LHHR, with particular attention to organ-specific postoperative complications.
Methods: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception through 15 July 2025 for comparative studies of RHHR and LHHR in adults. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The primary outcome was overall postoperative complications; secondary outcomes included cardiovascular, respiratory, and urological complications, dysphagia, operative time, intraoperative complications, 30-day readmission, mortality, and length of stay. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for cohort studies, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled as appropriate.
Results: Eleven comparative studies (10 retrospective and one prospective) involving 696,886 patients were included. Overall postoperative complications did not differ significantly between RHHR and LHHR (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.98–1.33). RHHR was associated with fewer intraoperative complications (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.24–0.73) and a modestly shorter hospital stay (MD −0.40 days, 95% CI −0.78–−0.02). In contrast, RHHR was associated with higher odds of cardiovascular events (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17–1.31), respiratory complications (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.59–1.71), 30-day readmission (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.19–1.27), and mortality (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11–1.43). No significant differences were observed for urological complications, postoperative dysphagia, or overall operative time. Certainty of evidence ranged from low to very low.
Conclusions: Comparative evidence identified through 15 July 2025 suggests broadly similar overall postoperative morbidity after RHHR and LHHR. RHHR may be associated with fewer intraoperative complications and a shorter hospital stay, but observed associations with higher odds of cardiopulmonary events, readmission, and mortality should be interpreted cautiously because the evidence is predominantly observational and susceptible to residual confounding, case-mix differences, and database-related bias.
Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD420251102047, PROSPERO identifier CRD420251102047.
Related
- Safety and Efficiency of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Revisional Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
- Operative efficiency and perioperative safety of overlap versus π-shaped esophagojejunostomy after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
- Short-term perioperative safety and long-term follow-up after robotic-assisted resection of non-renal, non-adrenal retroperitoneal tumors: a 10-year retrospective cohort study
- Optimizing Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Cholangiography in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on Dose, Timing, Route, Efficacy, and Safety
- GLP-1 receptor agonists in elective spine surgery: a systematic review of fusion outcomes, perioperative safety, and procedure-specific risk
BibTeX
@article{wu2026perioperative,
title = {{Perioperative safety profile of robotic versus laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis}},
author = {Xingyu Wu and Aokun Zhang and Chao Jin and Haifeng Han and Shuo Yang and Xuefeng Liu and Jinghui Lu},
journal = {Frontiers in Surgery},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fsurg.2026.1993235},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2026.1993235},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Perioperative safety profile of robotic versus laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Xingyu Wu
AU - Aokun Zhang
AU - Chao Jin
AU - Haifeng Han
AU - Shuo Yang
AU - Xuefeng Liu
AU - Jinghui Lu
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/21
JO - Frontiers in Surgery
DO - 10.3389/fsurg.2026.1993235
UR - https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2026.1993235
AB - Background: Robotic hiatal hernia repair (RHHR) is increasingly used, but whether its technical advantages improve perioperative safety compared with laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (LHHR) remains uncertain. We compared the short-term safety profiles of RHHR and LHHR, with particular attention to organ-specific postoperative complications. Methods: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception through 15 July 2025 for comparative studies of RHHR and LHHR in adults. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The primary outcome was overall postoperative complications; secondary outcomes included cardiovascular, respiratory, and urological complications, dysphagia, operative time, intraoperative complications, 30-day readmission, mortality, and length of stay. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for cohort studies, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled as appropriate. Results: Eleven comparative studies (10 retrospective and one prospective) involving 696,886 patients were included. Overall postoperative complications did not differ significantly between RHHR and LHHR (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.98–1.33). RHHR was associated with fewer intraoperative complications (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.24–0.73) and a modestly shorter hospital stay (MD −0.40 days, 95% CI −0.78–−0.02). In contrast, RHHR was associated with higher odds of cardiovascular events (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17–1.31), respiratory complications (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.59–1.71), 30-day readmission (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.19–1.27), and mortality (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11–1.43). No significant differences were observed for urological complications, postoperative dysphagia, or overall operative time. Certainty of evidence ranged from low to very low. Conclusions: Comparative evidence identified through 15 July 2025 suggests broadly similar overall postoperative morbidity after RHHR and LHHR. RHHR may be associated with fewer intraoperative complications and a shorter hospital stay, but observed associations with higher odds of cardiopulmonary events, readmission, and mortality should be interpreted cautiously because the evidence is predominantly observational and susceptible to residual confounding, case-mix differences, and database-related bias. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD420251102047, PROSPERO identifier CRD420251102047.
SN - 2296-875X
ER -