Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair using an Endoscope Manipulator Robot (EMARO).
METHODS: This retrospective study included 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs. The transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP) has been used to treat inguinal hernias. The patients were divided into two groups: one group underwent laparoscopic surgery using EMARO (E-TAPP) and the other group underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery (L-TAPP). The EMARO is a pneumatically driven endoscope-holder robot. The surgical outcomes of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: Fifteen patients underwent E-TAPP, and 36 underwent L-TAPP. The L-TAPP operation requires two personnel, whereas E-TAPP can be performed by one surgeon. The median operation times of the E-TAPP and L-TAPP groups were 81 min (range, 77-87) and 70 min (range, 60-94), respectively, and the median blood loss was 5 mL (range, 1-5) and 2 mL (range, 1-5). However, these differences were not statistically significant. The setup time for EMARO was approximately 8 min (range, 5-12). No patient experienced recurrence, and the postoperative complication rates were similar between the two groups. The number of patients who used postoperative analgesics in the E-TAPP and L-TAPP groups was four (n = 15) and 22 (n = 36), respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.042).
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery using EMARO can reduce labor costs and postoperative pain. The surgical outcomes of the E-TAPP group were not inferior to those of the L-TAPP group, and E-TAPP could also be safely performed.
METHODS: This retrospective study included 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs. The transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP) has been used to treat inguinal hernias. The patients were divided into two groups: one group underwent laparoscopic surgery using EMARO (E-TAPP) and the other group underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery (L-TAPP). The EMARO is a pneumatically driven endoscope-holder robot. The surgical outcomes of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: Fifteen patients underwent E-TAPP, and 36 underwent L-TAPP. The L-TAPP operation requires two personnel, whereas E-TAPP can be performed by one surgeon. The median operation times of the E-TAPP and L-TAPP groups were 81 min (range, 77-87) and 70 min (range, 60-94), respectively, and the median blood loss was 5 mL (range, 1-5) and 2 mL (range, 1-5). However, these differences were not statistically significant. The setup time for EMARO was approximately 8 min (range, 5-12). No patient experienced recurrence, and the postoperative complication rates were similar between the two groups. The number of patients who used postoperative analgesics in the E-TAPP and L-TAPP groups was four (n = 15) and 22 (n = 36), respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.042).
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery using EMARO can reduce labor costs and postoperative pain. The surgical outcomes of the E-TAPP group were not inferior to those of the L-TAPP group, and E-TAPP could also be safely performed.
摘要：
目的：本研究旨在探讨使用内窥镜机械手（EMARO）进行腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的手术效果。
方法：这项回顾性研究包括51例接受腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的患者。经腹腹膜前入路（TAPP）已用于治疗腹股沟疝。将患者分为两组：一组采用EMARO（E-TAPP）进行腹腔镜手术，另一组采用常规腹腔镜手术（L-TAPP）。EMARO是一个气动驱动的内窥镜支架机器人。比较两组腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的手术效果。
结果：15例患者接受了E-TAPP，36例接受了L-TAPP。L-TAPP操作需要两名人员,而E-TAPP可以由一名外科医生执行。E-TAPP和L-TAPP组的中位手术时间为81分钟（范围，77-87)和70分钟(范围，60-94），分别,中位失血量为5mL(范围，1-5）和2mL（范围，1-5).然而,这些差异没有统计学意义.EMARO的设置时间约为8分钟(范围，5-12).无患者复发,两组术后并发症发生率相似。在E-TAPP和L-TAPP组中使用术后镇痛药的患者人数分别为4（n=15）和22（n=36），分别,两组之间存在显着差异（p=0.042）。
结论：使用EMARO进行腹腔镜手术可以减少人工成本和术后疼痛。E-TAPP组的手术效果不劣于L-TAPP组,和E-TAPP也可以安全地进行。
方法：这项回顾性研究包括51例接受腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的患者。经腹腹膜前入路（TAPP）已用于治疗腹股沟疝。将患者分为两组：一组采用EMARO（E-TAPP）进行腹腔镜手术，另一组采用常规腹腔镜手术（L-TAPP）。EMARO是一个气动驱动的内窥镜支架机器人。比较两组腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的手术效果。
结果：15例患者接受了E-TAPP，36例接受了L-TAPP。L-TAPP操作需要两名人员,而E-TAPP可以由一名外科医生执行。E-TAPP和L-TAPP组的中位手术时间为81分钟（范围，77-87)和70分钟(范围，60-94），分别,中位失血量为5mL(范围，1-5）和2mL（范围，1-5).然而,这些差异没有统计学意义.EMARO的设置时间约为8分钟(范围，5-12).无患者复发,两组术后并发症发生率相似。在E-TAPP和L-TAPP组中使用术后镇痛药的患者人数分别为4（n=15）和22（n=36），分别,两组之间存在显着差异（p=0.042）。
结论：使用EMARO进行腹腔镜手术可以减少人工成本和术后疼痛。E-TAPP组的手术效果不劣于L-TAPP组,和E-TAPP也可以安全地进行。
