Evaluation of the Learning Curve in Robotic Nipple-sparing Mastectomy for Breast Cancer

The Full Continuum of Robotic Breast Surgery: Robotic-assisted Mastectomy, Robotic DIEP Flap, and Robotic Supermicrosurgery

In recent years, robotic surgery has rapidly expanded to improve surgical outcomes in a variety of surgical subspecialties. Although plastic surgery has taken longer to integrate robotic surgery into practice, the advantages of robotic-assisted surgery, including improved visualization and resolution, minimally invasive approaches, and the ability to surpass human precision and scale, have driven its more recent adoption into plastic surgery. Currently, procedures performed with robotic assistance that are considered part of the continuum of surgical treatment of breast cancer include robotic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy, reconstruction with the robotic latissimus dorsi flap or the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap, and robotic microsurgery for the flap anastomosis and/or the surgical treatment of lymphedema. The authors provide an overview of robotic surgery and how it has been integrated into the field of plastic surgery, as well as a review of the most common procedures within the field where robotic assistance can be incorporated: nipple-sparing mastectomy, robotic latissimus flap, robotic deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction, and microvascular anastomoses.

Robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with gel implant and latissimus dorsi muscle flap: Our initial experience

BACKGROUND

This study reports the preliminary results of da Vinci robot XI robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy immediate breast reconstruction (R-NSMIBR) with gel implant and latissimus dorsi muscle flap.

METHODS

A total of 15 patients who underwent R-NSMIBR with gel implant and latissimus dorsi muscle flap surgery for breast cancer between September 2022 and November 2022 were evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean total operative time for R-NSMIBR was 361.9 ± 77.0 min. As the learning curve increased, the robot arm docking time decreased rapidly from the initial 25-10 min. Average total blood loss was 27.8 ± 10.7 mL and posterior surgical margin positivity rate was 0%. Perioperative complications and local recurrences or deaths were not observed at a mean follow-up of 3 ± 1 month 15 patients were satisfied with postoperative aesthetic results.

CONCLUSIONS

R-NSMIBR with a gel implant and latissimus dorsi muscle flap could be a new therapeutic option for breast reconstruction.

Robotic-Assisted Nipple Sparing Mastectomy

Minimally invasive approaches to breast surgery have evolved from endoscopic techniques to recent developments in robotic-assisted mastectomies. Initial studies on robotic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) have shown improved patient satisfaction and aesthetic outcomes with similar complication rates and oncological outcomes in selected patients. This chapter reviews techniques used and available data on complications and clinical outcomes for RNSM. Currently, RNSM is an investigational technique in the United States and should be performed in clinical trials with U.S. Food & Drug Administration approval to rigorously evaluate the safety and effectiveness of this approach.

Mastectomy with Reconstruction Including Robotic Endoscopic Surgery (MARRES): a prospective cohort study of the Korea Robot-Endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG) and Korean Breast Cancer Study Group (KBCSG)

BACKGROUND

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) has emerged as a new treatment option for breast cancer and risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) for women who have a high risk of pathogenic variants. Even though several studies have reported that RNSM is a feasible procedure, some argue that it should only be performed by specialized surgeons, and data on oncologic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are limited. Recently, the United States Food and Drug Administration and several surgeons warned that robotic breast surgery should be performed only by specialized surgeons and recommended that the benefits, risks, and alternatives of all available treatment options be discussed with patients so they can make informed treatment decisions. The Korea Robot-Endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG) has been established to evaluate, standardize, and teach this state-of-the-art procedure. We have designed a multicenter prospective cohort study entitled Mastectomy with Reconstruction Including Robot Endoscopic Surgery (MARRES) to report surgical, PRO, and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

MARRES is a multi-institution cohort study prospectively collecting data from patients undergoing mastectomy and reconstruction. The patient inclusion criteria are adult women older than 19 with breast cancer or a high risk of breast cancer (patients with BRCA1/2, TP53, PALB2 mutations, etc.), who have scheduled therapeutic or RRM and want immediate reconstruction. Surgical outcomes, including pre- and postoperative photos, oncologic outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and PRO, are collected. The primary endpoints are postoperative complication rates within 30 postoperative days and the Clavien-Dindo grade of postoperative complications within 180 postoperative days. The secondary endpoints are 5-year postoperative recurrence-free survival and cancer incidence rate (for those who underwent RRM), patient satisfaction with reconstruction expectations preoperative (baseline) and results within 6 to 12 postoperative months, surgeon satisfaction with postoperative results in 6 postoperative months, and cost-effectiveness of the definitive surgery. Patient recruitment will be completed in April 2025, and the target number of enrolled patients is 2000.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide evidence about the surgical outcomes, oncologic outcomes, and patient satisfaction with RNSM and endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), compared with conventional NSM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04585074. Registered April 8, 2020.

Robot-assisted Nipple Sparing Mastectomy: Recent Advancements and Ongoing Controversies

Purpose of review

The purpose of this review is to summarize the recent technical advancements in RNSM, describe the ongoing teaching programs, and discuss the ongoing controversies.

Recent findings

Robot-assisted nipple sparing mastectomy (RNSM) is the newest addition to the armamentarium of surgical techniques for patients who require a mastectomy. The potential benefits of using the da Vinci® Robotic Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) are the small 3D camera and lighting offering superior visualization, the Endowrist robotic instruments offering greater range of motion, and surgeon being at a seated position at the console rendering a more ergonomic operating position.

Summary

RNSM can potentially help overcome the technical difficulties of performing a conventional NSM. Further studies are needed to elucidate the oncologic safety and cost-effectiveness of RNSM.

Breast Reconstruction with DIEP Flap: The Learning Curve at a Breast Reconstruction Center and a Single-Surgeon Study

Although microsurgical breast reconstruction represents a very interesting and rewarding field of plastic surgery, appropriate microsurgical training is not possible in every plastic surgery department. In this retrospective study, we present the learning curve of our plastic surgery department as a whole and of a single microsurgeon assessing breast reconstruction procedures with a deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap between July 2018 and June 2021. The present study included 115 patients and 161 flaps. Cases were stratified into single DIEP/double DIEP groups and into early and late groups based on the flap order. Surgery times and postoperative complications were analyzed. Regarding the institution, the length of hospital stay was lower in the late group than in the early group (single 7.1 ± 1.8 vs. 6.3 ± 1.5 days, p = 0.019; double 8.5 ± 3.8 vs. 6.6 ± 1.4 days, p = 0.043). Apart from that, no statistically significant differences were found between the start and end of our study. In terms of the single surgeon, there was a significant improvement in the total surgery time (single 296.0 ± 78.7 vs. 227.5 ± 54.7 min, p = 0.018; double 448.0 ± 85.6 vs. 341.2 ± 43.1 min, p = 0.008), flap ischemia time (53.6 ± 15.1 vs. 40.9 ± 9.5 min, p = 0.007) and length of stay among the compared groups. There was no significant difference in flap loss rate or other complications between the early and late groups. Further performance of surgeries seemed to improve the surgeon's skills as well as the overall experience of the medical institution.