Background: Robot-assisted surgery is a promising technical innovation. Given the similarities between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery it is unlikely that randomized controlled trials would be conducted to disclose any differences between these two technical instruments. Thus, skepticism remains due to lack of any definitive conclusions in the literature.
Aims: The aim of the study was to disclose any difference in outcome after robot-assisted (RNF) versus conventional laparoscopic (LNF) Nissen fundoplication for gastro-esophageal reflux disease in children.
Materials and methods: A literature review was carried out. Only studies comparing the two modalities were included. Operative time, duration of hospital stay, 30 days morbidity, mortality, conversion, recurrence and complication rates were analyzed. Review Manager 5.1.6 software, from the Cochrane library, was used for statistical analysis.
Results: Three case series fulfilled the criteria for inclusion in this review. Data on 174 children were identified; 89 were operated on using the computer-assisted technology and 85 controls were operated on using the conventional laparoscopic technique. Data showed no significant difference between these two modalities.
Discussion: This literature review demonstrates no significant difference between patients operated on with robot-assisted surgery and those undergoing conventional laparoscopic surgery regarding the parameters studied.
Conclusion: The robot-assisted Nissen fundoplication in children is a safe alternative to conventional laparoscopic surgery. No data support the need for case selection to one of these two minimally invasive procedures.
Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.