AUTHOR=Ward T. L. , Al-Amiedy Z. , Robinson P. , Sharma A. , McClean S. , Walsh C. J. , Simpson G. S. 

TITLE=Introduction of Robotic Abdominal Wall Reconstruction Into a UK-Abdominal Wall Reconstruction Practice: Early Outcomes and Economic Analysis

JOURNAL=Journal of Abdominal Wall Surgery

VOLUME=Volume 4 - 2025

YEAR=2025

URL=https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/journals/journal-of-abdominal-wall-surgery/articles/10.3389/jaws.2025.13710

DOI=10.3389/jaws.2025.13710

ISSN=2813-2092

ABSTRACT=There is strong evidence that robotic abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) reduces length of stay and postoperative complications. Despite this, it remains significantly restricted in public funded healthcare systems due to reported cost and limited access to robotic surgical platforms.Cases were reviewed from a prospectively maintained database of AWR patients at a single unit, undergoing Robotic Rives-Stoppa repair or open Rives-Stoppa repair. A prospectively maintained database was accessed and analysed. Data analysed included demographics, co-morbidities, hernia characteristics, operative times and surgical outcomes. Cost-analysis was performed on the basis of length of stay, critical care bed days, and cost of consumables.Date were collected from 28 robotic rives-stoppa repairs and 18 open rives-stoppa repairs. There was no difference in operative time in the two groups (199mins vs 186mins, p=0.147). The anaesthetic time was shorter in the robotic group (36mins vs 56mins, p=<0.001), and length of stay was longer in the open group (2days vs 7days, p=<0.001). There were 5 critical care unit bed days in the open group, vs 0 in the robotic group, (p=<.001). Complications were not significantly different (10.7% vs 22.0%, p=0.407), and there were no incidents of post-operative mortality. Cost analysis showed an average saving of £1,807.58 per case.Our series demonstrates that robotic rives-stoppa AWR can be delivered in a safe manner providing financial savings and equivalent operative time compared with open surgery.