Robotic mastectomy: the next major advance in breast cancer surgery?

Learning curve for robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy: A single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted nipple sparing mastectomy (RANSM) is emerging because it offers hidden incisions and ergonomic movements. In this study, we report the learning curve and feasibility of RANSM.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted among women who underwent RANSM with immediate breast reconstruction from July 2019 to June 2022. All RANSM procedures were performed by a single surgeon. We divided all the cases into two phases: the early phase (cases 1 to 21) and the late phase (cases 22 to 46). The total operation time, breast operation time, docking time, and console time were analyzed, and the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method was used to evaluate the effects of case experience accumulation on the time required for RANSM. Postoperative complications were analyzed according to their Clavien-Dindo grade.

RESULTS

Overall, 42 women underwent 46 RANSM procedures. In the early and late phases, the mean console times were 78.1 min and 60.1 min (p = 0.011), respectively. In learning curve analysis, 21 RANSM procedures were required to reduce the breast operation time. Two cases of Clavien-Dindo grade III postoperative complications occurred (4.3 %). One case was an implant removal caused by infection, and the other was partial nipple ischemia; both occurred in the early phase, with none in the late phase.

CONCLUSIONS

The breast operation time improved after the 21st RANSM procedure, and only two cases had Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher postoperative complications. RANSM is thus technically feasible and acceptable, with a short learning curve.

Evaluation of safety and operative time in tumescent-free robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy: a retrospective single-center cohort study

Purpose

Tumescent in nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been reported to increase the risk of necrosis by impairing blood flow to the skin flap and nipple-areolar complex. At our institution, we introduced a tumescent-free robotic NSM using the da Vinci single-port system (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent tumescent-free robotic NSM between October 2020 and March 2023 at Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea). Clinicopathological characteristics, adverse events, and operative time were evaluated.

Results

During the study period, 118 patients underwent tumescent-free robotic NSM. Thirty-one patients (26.3%) experienced an adverse event. Five patients (4.2%) were classified as grade III based on the Clavien-Dindo classification and required surgery. The mean total operative time was 467 minutes for autologous tissue reconstruction (n = 49) and 252 minutes for implants (n = 69). No correlation was found between the cumulative number of surgical cases and the breast operative time (P = 0.30, 0.52, 0.59 for surgeons A, B, C) for the 3 surgeons. However, a significant linear relationship (P < 0.001) was observed, with the operative time increasing by 13 minutes for every 100-g increase in specimen weight.

Conclusion

Tumescent-free robotic NSM is a safe procedure with a feasible operative time and few adverse events.

Postoperative outcomes of minimally invasive versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy with prosthesis breast reconstruction in breast cancer: a meta-analysis

Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor worldwide, and mastectomy remains the primary strategy for treating early stage breast cancer. However, the complication rates, surgical variables, and oncologic safety of minimally invasive nipple-sparing mastectomy (MINSM) have not been fully addressed. We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs that compared MINSM with conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (CNSM), both followed by Prosthesis Breast Reconstruction (PBR). The main outcomes observed included overall complications, (Grade III) complications, skin and nipple necrosis, wound dehiscence, infection, seroma, hematoma, implant loss, and oncologic safety (positive margins and recurrence). Secondary outcomes included operation time, blood loss, hospital stay, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction. Binary and continuous variables were compared using odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 10 studies involving 2,166 patients were included. There were no statistically significant differences between MINSM and CNSM in terms of skin necrosis, wound dehiscence, infection, seroma, hematoma, implant loss, or oncologic safety. However, MINSM significantly reduced overall complications (OR = 0. 74, 95% CI [0. 58, 0. 94], p = 0. 01) and (Grade III) complications (OR = 0. 47, 95% CI [0. 31, 0. 71], p = 0. 0003). Nipple necrosis events were also significantly reduced in the MINSM group (OR = 0. 49, 95% CI [0. 30, 0. 80], p = 0. 005). Patient satisfaction improved notably in the MINSM group. Additionally, compared with the CNSM group, the MINSM group had longer operating times (MD = 46. 88, 95% CI [19. 55, 74. 21], p = 0. 0008) and hospital stays (MD = 1. 39, 95% CI [0. 65, 2. 12], p < 0. 001), while intraoperative blood loss was significantly reduced (MD = -29. 05, 95% CI [-36. 20, -21. 90], p < 0. 001). Compared with CNSM, MINSM offers advantages in reducing complications and intraoperative blood loss, as well as improving aesthetic outcomes and patient satisfaction. Therefore, MINSM may become a viable option for breast surgery. Nevertheless, a long-term evaluation of the oncologic safety of this approach is necessary to ensure its efficacy and safety for patients.

Endoscopic mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction with fat grafting for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopic mastectomy has been associated with good tolerance and enhanced patient satisfaction, limitations such as the implant or flap size for reconstruction with small incisions remain unresolved. Fat grafting (FG) can expand tissue volume with pinhole skin incisions. Herein, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of endoscopic mastectomy followed by immediate FG.

METHODS

Patients who underwent endoscopic mastectomy with immediate FG reconstruction from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively evaluated to establish surgical outcomes and prognosis.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with clinical stage 0 or I breast cancer underwent unilateral endoscopic mastectomy with immediate FG. The median age was 45 years (41-55), and the median body mass index was 19.3 kg/m2 (15.8-26.6). Endoscopically performed procedures included skin-sparing mastectomies in 18 patients (78%) and nipple-sparing mastectomies in five patients (22%). The median procedure duration was 295 min (242-346). The median specimen weight was 133 g (71-334), and the median grafted fat volume was 200 mL (136-320). No patient required reoperation or additional procedures for complications. One patient experienced recurrence at a median follow-up of 56.1 months and underwent resection; the patient was alive without recurrence 54 months post-resection.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of endoscopic mastectomy with immediate FG for reconstruction. When compared with other immediate autologous reconstructions, our strategy could minimize the skin incision and procedure duration, as well as limit complications. Further prospective investigations are needed to evaluate oncological safety, surgical outcomes, and patient satisfaction.

Six steps for a successful aesthetic free flap reconstruction after minimally invasive mastectomy: a retrospective case-control study

OBJECTIVE

Breast cancer treatment has evolved to the modern skin-sparing mastectomy and nipple-sparing mastectomy. To better perform these surgeries, minimally invasive techniques using the endoscope, or Da Vinci Robotic Surgery platform have been developed. The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is the gold standard in breast reconstruction, but it is still not commonly performed after minimally invasive mastectomy due technical difficulty. Here the authors introduced six key steps to a successful aesthetic autologous free flap reconstruction in in minimally invasive mastectomies.

METHODS

There are six main steps to our technique: placement of mastectomy incision, precise flap design after angiography studies, trial of shaping, transcutaneous medial suture, footprint recreation and postoperative shaping with bra. Between November 2018 and July 2022, a total of 67 immediate breast reconstructions using free perforator flaps were performed in 63 patients after minimally invasive nipple-sparing mastectomy.

RESULTS

The results from the minimally invasive mastectomy group were compared with a group of conventional mastectomy patients ( n= 41) performed during the same period. There were no significant differences in flap exploration rates. One hundred percent of the flaps survived. In the minimally invasive group, the final scar was placed in the lateral region, where it would be hidden from the anterior view. Only 70.7% of the conventional mastectomy group could achieve a hidden lateral scar ( P <0.001). The aesthetic revision rates were similar between two groups.

CONCLUSION

With attention to the six steps above, autologous free flap reconstruction can be offered reliably in the setting of minimally invasive mastectomy.

Robotic Versus Conventional or Endoscopic-assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Prosthesis Breast Reconstruction in the Management of Breast Cancer: A Prospectively Designed Multicenter Trial Comparing Clinical Outcomes, Medical Cost, and Patient-reported Outcomes (RCENSM-P)

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of minimal access and conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM). The secondary outcomes investigated included medical costs and oncological safety.

BACKGROUND

Minimal-access NSM has been increasingly applied in the treatment of patients with breast cancer. However, prospective multicenter trials comparing robotic-assisted NSM (R-NSM) versus C-NSM or endoscopic-assisted NSM (E-NSM) are lacking.

METHODS

A prospectively designed 3-arm multicenter, nonrandomized trial (NCT04037852) was conducted from October 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021, to compare R-NSM with C-NSM or E-NSM.

RESULTS

A total of 73 R-NSM, 74 C-NSM, and 84 E-NSM procedures were enrolled. The median wound length and operation time of C-NSM was (9 cm, 175 minutes), (4 cm, and 195 minutes) in R-NSM, and (4 cm and 222 minutes) in E-NSM. Complications were comparable among the groups. Better wound healing was observed in the minimal-access NSM group. The R-NSM procedure was 4000 and 2600 United States Dollars more expensive than C-NSM and E-NSM, respectively. Wound/scar and postoperative acute pain evaluation favored the use of minimal access NSM over C-NSM. Quality of life in terms of chronic breast/chest pain, mobility, and range of motion of the upper extremity showed no significant differences. The preliminary oncologic results showed no differences among the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

R-NSM or E-NSM is a safe alternative if compared with C-NSM in terms of perioperative morbidities, especially with better wound healing. The advantage of minimal access groups was higher wound-related satisfaction. Higher costs remain one of the major limiting factors in the widespread adoption of R-NSM.

Robotics in Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer: A Perspective View

This perspective article aims to summarize and provide an outlook for developments around the use of robotics in the screening, diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. We searched existing literature on the design and development of new systems and the current use of pre-existing surgical robotic systems. Robotic interventions for breast palpation and biopsy under ultrasound and MRI guidance are being developed and tested on simulated breast phantoms. Results are comparable to those achieved by clinicians; however, there are yet to be any human trials. Existing robotic surgical systems have been evaluated in human trials to perform nipple-sparing mastectomy and harvesting of autologous tissue for breast reconstruction. Results are comparable to traditional NSM and demonstrate positive short-term outcomes for patients. Robotic devices could revolutionize the clinical workflow around breast cancer through less invasive surgery, greater accuracy in biopsies and microsurgery and a potential reduction in clinicians' workload. However, more research into the practical deployment of these devices and concrete scientific evidence of better patient outcomes is needed.

Controversies and strengths of robot-assisted mastectomy

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is used to improve cosmetic outcomes while maintaining oncological safety in patients with early breast cancer; however, NSM requires a higher level of skill and workload than mastectomy and is associated with long, visible scars. Robotic surgical systems reduce surgeon workload and facilitate precise surgery. Considering the increasing support of robot-assisted NSM (RNSM), this paper aims to discuss the current controversies based on the research findings reported thus far. There are four concerns regarding RNSM; increased cost, oncological outcomes, the level of experience and skill, and standardization. It should be noted that RNSM is not a surgery performed on all patients but rather a procedure performed on selected patients who meet specific indications. A large-scale randomized clinical trial comparing robotic and conventional NSM has recently begun in Korea; therefore, it is necessary to wait for these results for more insight into oncological outcomes. Although the level of experience and skill required for robotic mastectomy may not be easily achieved by all surgeons, the learning curve for RNSM appears manageable and can be overcome with appropriate training and practice. Training programs and standardization efforts will help improve the overall quality of RNSM. There are some advantages to RNSM. The robotic system provides improved precision and accuracy, helping remove breast tissue more effectively. RNSM has advantages such as smaller scars, less blood loss, and a lower rate of surgical complications. Patients who undergo RNSM report better quality of life.

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.

Outcomes of robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy in women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The promising results of the robotic approach for multiple cancer operations has led to interest in the potential of robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM); however, further studies are required to compare the benefits and complications of this approach with those of conventional open nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM). We performed a meta-analysis to compare surgical complications of R-NSM versus C-NSM. We performed a review of literature through June 2022 in PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohorts, case-control studies, and case series with > 50 patients comparing the two techniques. Separate meta-analyses were conducted according to study design. From 80 publications, we identified six studies. The sample size ranged from 63 to 311 mastectomies from 63 to 275 patients. The tumor size and disease stage were similar between groups. The positive margin rate was 0-4.6% in the R-NSM arm and 0-2.9% in the C-NSM arm. Four studies reported early recurrence data, which were similar between groups (R-NSM: 0%, C-NSM: 0-8%). The R-NSM group had a lower rate of overall complications compared to the C-NSM group in cohorts/RCTs (RR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.49-0.96). In case-control studies, rate of necrosis was lower with R-NSM. Operative time was significantly longer in the R-NSM group in cohort/RCTs. In early experience with R-NSM, R-NSM had a lower overall complication rate compared to C-NSM in cohorts/RCTs. While these data are promising, our results show variability and heterogeneity limiting definitive conclusions. Additional trials are needed to guide the role of R-NSM and its oncologic outcomes.

Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic and Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction: International Multicenter Pooled Data Analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) has been developed to reduce conspicuous scar and increase the quality of life in women. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical and oncologic outcomes of RNSM with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) compared with conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (CNSM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This international multicenter, pooled analysis of individual patient-level data enrolled a total of 755 procedures in 659 women (609 had breast cancer and 50 underwent risk-reducing mastectomy) who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy with IBR. Surgical and oncologic outcomes, including 30-days postoperative (POD 30d) complication rate, nipple necrosis rate, grade of Clavien-Dindo classification, disease-free survival, and overall survival, were evaluated. Propensity score-matched analyses were performed to adjust for confounding factors.

RESULTS

The median age of both the RNSM and CNSM groups was 45 years. The RNSM group had lower body mass index (BMI) and a higher proportion of benign disease compared with the CNSM group. POD 30d complications and postoperative complication grade III rates were lower in the RNSM group than in the CNSM group (p < 0.05). The nipple necrosis rate was 2.2% and 7.8% for RNSM and CNSM, respectively (p = 0.002). After propensity score matching, significantly lower rates of POD 30d complications, nipple necrosis, and postoperative complication grade III occurred in the RNSM group than in the CNSM group (all p < 0.05). Oncologic outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RNSM can provide better cosmetic results with favorable surgical and oncologic outcomes for women with early breast cancer or BRCA mutation.