Robotic transabdominal preperitoneal versus laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) and robotic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repairs have emerged as alternatives to open surgery, but direct comparisons of their outcomes remain limited. This study compared the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic TAPP (R-TAPP) versus laparoscopic TEP (L-TEP) for inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted from inception to October 2025, without language restrictions. Meta-analyses were performed using pooled effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and trial sequential analysis (TSA) evaluated the conclusiveness of evidence.

RESULTS

Six studies with a total of 992 patients (510 R-TAPP, 482 L-TEP) were included. R-TAPP demonstrated significantly longer operative time (MD: 17.76 min; 95% CI: 3.83 to 31.70; p = 0.01), and a slightly longer hospital stay (MD: 0.16 days; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.29; p = 0.01), though the latter was likely not clinically meaningful. Sensitivity and trial sequential analyses suggested a significant reduction in postoperative pain with R-TAPP, with TSA confirming robust evidence for lower pain scores (median unbiased estimate MD: -1.59; 95% CI: -2.41 to -0.76; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in recurrence rates, seroma formation, urinary retention, or wound infection.

CONCLUSION

Robotic TAPP inguinal hernia repair offers comparable safety and efficacy to laparoscopic TEP, with potential benefits in reducing postoperative pain but requires longer operative time and hospital stay. Both techniques demonstrate similar rates of recurrence and complications. Further randomized trials with an extended follow-up are recommended to confirm these findings and inform best practices.