Robotic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction: Surgical Technique

Fully Telemetric Robotic Microsurgery: Clinical Experience With 23 Cases

BACKGROUND

Recently, there is an ongoing trend in plastic surgery with robotic-assisted microsurgery and supermicrosurgery devices being developed. Combining a telemetrically controlled robotic microscope with an also telemetrically controlled microsurgery robot unlocks synergistic effects with complete disconnection of the operating surgeon from the operating field. Here, we report the first clinical free flap reconstructions using this setup.

METHODS

Twenty-three surgeries were performed with the combined remote approach using the Symani Surgical System and the RoboticScope in open microsurgery procedures. Anastomosis time and ischemia time were recorded. The surgical performance for anastomoses was assessed using the modified Structured Assessment of Microsurgical Skills (SAMS) score. Subjective satisfaction was evaluated by the surgeons in comparison with conventional microsurgery. To evaluate the learning curve, the senior authors first four (first group) and last four (last group) procedures were compared.

RESULTS

Overall, flap survival was 95.7%. The average arterial anastomosis time was 36.7 ± 10.9 min. Total time of surgery was 277.7 ± 63.8 min, and ischemia time was 100.6 ± 24.9 min. Most SAMS score parameters were significantly higher in the last group of surgical procedures compared with the first operations. Subjective satisfaction was equal or better with the combined robotic-assisted approach in most categories.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrates safety and feasibility of the use of a combined remote approach. Robotic systems for microsurgical procedures may hold promising potential for improvement of surgical quality and open up new frontiers in microsurgery.

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.

The emerging role of robotics in plastic and reconstructive surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The role of robotics has grown exponentially. There is an active interest amongst practitioners in the transferability of the potential benefits into plastic and reconstructive surgery; however, many plastic surgeons report lack of widespread implementation, training, or clinical exposure. We report the current evidence base, and surgical opportunities, alongside key barriers, and limitations to overcome, to develop the use of robotics within the field. This systematic review of PubMed, Medline, and Embase has been conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024524237). Preclinical, educational, and clinical articles were included, within the scope of plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2, 181, articles were screened; 176 articles met the inclusion criteria across lymph node dissection, flap and microsurgery, vaginoplasty, craniofacial reconstruction, abdominal wall reconstruction and transoral robotic surgery (TOR). A number of benefits have been reported including technical advantages such as better visualisation, improved precision and accuracy, and tremor reduction. Patient benefits include lower rate of complications and quicker recovery; however, there is a longer operative duration in some categories. Cost presents a significant barrier to implementation. Robotic surgery presents an exciting opportunity to improve patient outcomes and surgical ease of use, with feasibility for many subspecialities demonstrated in this review. However, further higher quality comparative research with careful case selection, which is adequately powered, as well as the inclusion of cost-analysis, is necessary to fully understand the true benefit for patient care, and justification for resource utilisation.

Emerging Role of Robotic Surgery in the Breast

In recent years, there has been increased adoption of robotic technology in oncologic breast surgery, particularly with the use of robotic nipple sparing mastectomy (r-NSM). Here we review the emergence of robotic-assisted surgery in breast procedures, and discuss the safety, limited oncologic outcomes, apparent advantages, and potential limitations of r-NSM compared to conventional open-NSM (c-NSM). Limited data suggests that robotic-assisted surgery offers smaller incisions and potential for improved cosmesis and ergonomic advantage when compared to c-NSM. Similar periprocedural complication rates are seen with r-NSM compared with c-NSM. Short-term oncologic follow-up is reassuring however, but remains early and continues to be investigated. The increased cost of r-NSM compared to open surgery and feasibility of widespread adoption of the procedure are important considerations that need to be evaluated. Randomized trials are currently ongoing to address the apparent advantages, oncologic outcomes, and cost/feasibility of robotic breast surgery.

Postoperative complications and surgical outcomes of robotic versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most common cancer worldwide, with remarkable advances in early diagnosis, systemic treatments, and surgical techniques. Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy has been trialled; however, the complication rates, surgical outcomes, and oncological safety of this approach remain obscure.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was conducted from conception until September 2022. Studies examining complications and operative variables where robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy was compared with conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy were included. Primary study outcomes were complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III complications, skin or nipple necrosis, seroma, haematoma, infection, implant loss, and wound dehiscence) and oncological safety (recurrence and positive margins). The secondary outcomes included operative variables, length of stay, cost-effectiveness, learning curve, and aesthetic outcome.

RESULTS

A total of seven studies of overall fair quality, involving 1674 patients, were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Grade 3 complications were reduced in robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy without statistical significance (OR 0.60 (95 per cent c.i. 0.35 to 1.05)). Nipple necrosis was significantly reduced in robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (OR 0.54 (95 per cent c.i. 0.30 to 0.96); P = 0.03; I2 = 15 per cent). Operating time (mean difference +58.81 min (95 per cent c.i. +28.19 to +89.44 min); P = 0.0002) and length of stay (mean difference +1.23 days (95 per cent c.i. +0.64 to +1.81 days); P < 0.0001) were significantly increased in robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy, whereas the opposite was true for blood loss (mean difference -53.18 ml (95 per cent c.i. -71.78 to -34.58 ml); P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Whilst still in its infancy, robotic breast surgery may become a viable option in breast surgery. Nonetheless, the oncological safety of this approach requires robust assessment.

Modern Innovations in Breast Surgery: Robotic Breast Surgery and Robotic Breast Reconstruction

Robotic surgery has a history of applications in multiple surgical areas and has been applied in plastic surgery over the past decade. Robotic surgery allows for minimal access incisions and decreased donor site morbidity in breast extirpative surgery, breast reconstruction, and lymphedema surgery. Although a learning curve exists for the use of this technology, it can be safely applied with careful preoperative planning. Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy may be combined with either robotic alloplastic or robotic autologous reconstruction in the appropriate patient.

Trans-axillary single port insufflation technique-assisted endoscopic surgery for breast diseases: Clinic experience, cosmetic outcome and oncologic result

Purpose

With an increasing demand for postoperative cosmetic effects in breast diseases, the single port by trans-axillary incision and air-inflation system, which provided better space and spared the assistant the effort of retraction, is widely used in clinic surgical treatment for multiple breast diseases.

Methods

According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, patients who underwent trans-axillary single-incision surgery at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Hospital between December 2020 and July 2022 were included in the study. We collected and analyzed data on age, fertility history, ultrasound grade, clinical stage, pathological results, oncological prognosis, patient-centered cosmetic outcome, etc.

Results

A total of 115 cases were included, of which 33 patients with benign disease underwent mass resection, 68 patients with malignant tumors underwent mastectomy. 10 patients had a special type of breast lesion. A mastectomy was performed in 4 patients with male mammary gland development. Of the 115 cases, the maximum mass diameter was 3.00 ± 1.644 (0.6–8.5) cm. Blood loss during surgery was 85.77 ± 50.342 (10-200) ml. The surgery took 131.84 ± 59.332 (30-280) minutes to complete. The patient spent a total of 5.05 ± 2.305 (2-18) days in the hospital. And the length of surgical incision in all patients was 3.83 ± 0.884 (3-8) cm. All patients were very satisfied with the appearance of their breasts after dressing. 94.78% of patients were satisfied with the position of the incision.

Conclusion

Through this study, we believe that in benign breast diseases and malignant breast tumors, trans-axillary single port insufflation technique-assisted endoscopic surgery has oncological safety and an aesthetic effect for most people with breast diseases.

Robot-assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Breast Reconstruction: An initial Experience of the Korea Robot-endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to present the results of early experience of robot-assisted nipple sparing mastectomy (RANSM).

BACKGROUND

RANSM improves cosmetic outcomes over conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy. However, data on the feasibility and safety of the RANSM are limited.

METHODS

Patients who underwent RANSM with immediate breast reconstruction as part of the Korea Robot-endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG) from November 2016 to January 2020 were enrolled. clinicopathologic characteristics, perioperative complications, and operation time were collected.

RESULTS

Overall, 73 women underwent 82 RANSM procedures conducted by 11 breast surgeons at 8 institutions. The median patient age was 45.5 years old (20-66 years), and 52 (63.4%) patients were premenopausal. Invasive breast cancer was noted in 55 cases (40 cases were stage i, 11 cases were stage ii, and 4 cases were stage iii, respectively) and ductal carcinoma in-situ was recorded in 20 cases. Of those, 3 patients with BRCA1/2 mutation carriers underwent contralateral risk-reducing RANSM. The median length of hospitalization was 12.0 days (5.0-24.0 days). The incision location was the mid-axillary line and the median incision length was 50.0 mm (30.0-60.0 mm). Median total operation time, median total mastectomy time, and median reconstruction time was 307.0 minutes (163.0-796.0 minutes), 189.5 minutes (97.5-325.0 minutes), and 119.5 minutes (45.0-689.0 minutes). Only 2 cases (2.5%) required reoperation. Nipple ischemia was found in 9 cases (10.9%) but only 1 case (1.2%) required nipple excision given that 8 cases (9.7%) resolved spontaneously. Skin ischemia was observed in 5 cases (6.1%) and only 2 (2.4%) cases needed skin excision whereas 3 cases (3.6%) resolved spontaneously. There was no conversion to open surgery orcases of mortality. The mean time for mastectomy among surgeons who performed more than 10 cases was 182.3 minutes (± 53.7, minutes) and 195.4 minutes (± 50.4, minutes).

CONCLUSION

This was the first report of RANSM conducted in the KoREa-BSG. RANSM is technically feasible and acceptable with a short learning curve. Further prospective research to evaluate surgical and oncologic outcomes is needed.

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Breast Surgery: Recent Evidence with Comparative Clinical Outcomes

In recent times, robot-assisted surgery has been prominently gaining pace to minimize overall postsurgical complications with minimal traumatization, due to technical advancements in telerobotics and ergonomics. The aim of this review is to explore the efficiency of robot-assisted systems for executing breast surgeries, including microsurgeries, direct-to-implant breast reconstruction, deep inferior epigastric perforators-based surgery, latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction, and nipple-sparing mastectomy. Robot-assisted surgery systems are efficient due to 3D-based visualization, dexterity, and range of motion while executing breast surgery. The review describes the comparative efficiency of robot-assisted surgery in relation to conventional or open surgery, in terms of clinical outcomes, morbidity rates, and overall postsurgical complication rates. Potential cost-effective barriers and technical skills were also delineated as the major limitations associated with these systems in the clinical sector. Furthermore, instrument articulation of robot-assisted surgical systems (for example, da Vinci systems) can enable high accuracy and precision surgery due to its promising ability to mitigate tremors at the time of surgery, and shortened learning curve, making it more beneficial than other open surgery procedures.

Transcutaneous medial fixation sutures for free flap inset after robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy

The application of minimal invasive mastectomy has allowed surgeons to perform nipplesparing mastectomy via a shorter, inconspicuous incision under clear vision and with more precise hemostasis. However, it poses new challenges in microsurgical breast reconstruction, such as vascular anastomosis and flap insetting, which are considerably more difficult to perform through the shorter incision on the lateral breast border. We propose an innovative technique of transcutaneous medial fixation sutures to help in flap insetting and creating and maintaining the medial breast border. The sutures are placed after mastectomy and before flap transfer. Three 4-0 nylon suture loops are placed transcutaneously and into the pocket at the markings of the preferred lower medial border of the reconstructed breast. After microvascular anastomosis and temporary shaping of the flap on top of the mastectomy skin, the three corresponding points for the sutures are identified. The three nylon loops are then sutured to the dermis of the corresponding medial point of the flap. The flap is placed into the pocket by a simultaneous gentle pull on the three sutures and a combined lateral push. The stitches are then tied and buried after completion of flap inset.

Robotic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate microsurgical free flap reconstruction: Feasibility and aesthetic results - Case series

BACKGROUND

The application of robotic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM) has allowed mastectomy to be performed via a small incision. Breast reconstruction with free autologous tissue results in the most natural and long-lasting results, however, its application in R-NSM can be difficult via the small incision and haven't been explored in depth. The purpose of the study was to investigate the feasibility and aesthetic outcome of free perforator flap breast reconstruction via small lateral chest wall incision after R-NSM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients who received R-NSM and free perforator flap reconstruction as the study group and patients who received conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM) and free perforator flap reconstruction as the control group from January 2018 to August 2020 by single reconstructive surgeon. Patient demographic data, complications from both mastectomy and reconstruction, status of resection margin and oncological outcome were reviewed. Aesthetic outcome was evaluated by 9 plastic surgeons.

RESULTS

A total of 63 patients were included of which 22 (34.9%) received R-NSM and 41 (65.1%) received C-NSM. Their demographic data, reconstruction flaps, overall complication rate and follow up time were similar. Unlike C-NSM, majority of the R-NSM groups used the thoracodorsal or lateral thoracic vessels as the recipient vessels. Patients in the R-NSM group has smaller scar and better aesthetic outcome in the symmetry of breast inframammary fold, scar location and visibility, and overall aesthetic outcome.

CONCLUSION

Although with difficulty in microvascular anastomosis and flap inset and shaping, R-NSM with perforator flap reconstruction presented with equal surgical and oncological safety with C-NSM and even better aesthetic results.

A Randomized Trial of Robotic Mastectomy versus Open Surgery in Women With Breast Cancer or BRCA Mutation

Objective

To compare robotic mastectomy with open classical technique outcomes in breast cancer patients.

Summary Background Data

As the use of robotic nipple sparing mastectomy continues to rise, improved understanding of the surgical, oncologic and quality of life outcomes is imperative for appropriate patient selection as well as to better understand indications, limits, advantages and dangers.

Methods

In a phase III, open label, single center, randomized controlled trial involving 80 women with breast cancer (69) or with BRCA mutation (11), we compared the outcome of robotic and open nipple sparing mastectomy. Primary outcomes were surgical complications and quality of life using specific validated questionnaires. Secondary objective included oncologic outcomes.

Results

Robotic procedure was 1 hour and 18 minutes longer than open (P < 0.001). No differences in the number or type of complications (P = 0.11) were observed. Breast-Q scores in satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial, physical and sexual well-being were significantly higher after robotic mastectomy vs open procedure. Respect to baseline, physical and sexual well-being domains remained stable after robotic mastectomy while they significantly decreased after open procedure (P<= 0.02). The overall Body Image Scale questionnaire score was 20.7 +/- 13.8 vs. 9.9 +/- 5.1 in the robotic vs open groups respectively, P < 0.0001. At median follow-up 28.6 months (range 3.7-43.3), no local events were observed.

Conclusions

Complications were similar among groups upholding the robotic technique to be safe. Quality of life was maintained after robotic mastectomy while significantly decrease after open surgery. Early follow up confirm no premature local failure. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03440398.

Robotic Versus Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Breast Reconstruction

Background

Several studies reported the feasibility and safety of robotic-NSM (R-NSM). The aim of our prospective study was to compare R-NSM and conventional-NSM (C-NSM).

Methods

We analyzed patients who were operated on with and without robotic assistance (R-NSM or C-NSM) and who received immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) with implant or latissimus dorsi-flap (LDF). The main objective was complication rate and secondary aims were post-operative length of hospitalization (POLH), duration of surgery, and cost.

Results

We analyzed 87 R-NSM and 142 C-NSM with implant-IBR in 50 and 135 patients, with LDF-IBR in 37 and 7 patients, respectively. Higher durations of surgery and costs were observed for R-NSM, without a difference in POLH and interval time to adjuvant therapy between R-NSM and C-NSM. In the multivariate analysis, R-NSM was not associated with a higher breast complication rate (OR=0.608) and significant factors were breast cup-size, LDF combined with implant-IBR, tobacco and inversed-T incision. Grade 2-3 breast complications rate were 13% for R-NSM and 17.3% for C-NSM, significantly higher for LDF combined with implant-IBR, areolar/radial incisions and BMI>=30. A predictive score was calculated (AUC=0.754). In logistic regression, patient's satisfaction between C-NSM and R-NSM were not significantly different, with unfavorable results for BMI >=25 (OR=2.139), NSM for recurrence (OR=5.371) and primary breast cancer with radiotherapy (OR=4.533). A predictive score was calculated. In conclusion, our study confirms the comparable clinical outcome between C- NSM and R-NSM, in the price of longer surgery and higher cost for R-NSM. Predictive scores of breast complications and satisfaction were significantly associated with factors known in the pre-operative period.

Comparison between Gasless and Gas-Inflated Robot-Assisted Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Purpose

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) includes various techniques, including conventional or endoscopic mastectomies. Since the introduction of robot-assisted NSM (RANSM) in 2015, 2 main methods have been used: gasless and gas-inflated techniques. The aim of this study was to compare clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications between patients treated with gasless RANSM and those treated with gas-inflated RANSM.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of women who underwent gasless or gas-inflated RANSM with immediate breast reconstruction between November 2016 and May 2019. The indications for RANSM were early breast cancer, interstitial mastopathy, or BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications were analyzed. The severity of complications was graded using the Clavien-Dindo system.

Results

A total of 58 RANSM procedures were performed in 46 women: 15 cases of gasless RANSM and 43 cases of gas-inflated RANSM. The proportion of node-negative disease was higher in the gas-inflated group (97.1%) than in the gasless group (69.2%, p = 0.016). Adjuvant radiotherapy was administered in 30.6% of the cases in the gasless group and only 5% of the cases in the gas-inflated group. Other clinicopathological factors were not significantly different between the groups. Regarding surgical outcomes, the initial incision was 1 cm longer in the gasless group (5.17 ± 0.88 cm) than that in the gas-inflated group (4.20 ± 1.05 cm; p = 0.002). The final incision was also longer in the gasless group (5.17 ± 0.88 cm) than that in the gas-inflated group (4.57 ± 1.07 cm; p = 0.040). Operation time, complication rate, and complication grade were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

In this study, there were no significant differences in surgical outcomes or postoperative complications between gasless and gas-inflated RANSM, except for a longer incision with the gasless technique. Both techniques are reasonable options for RANSM followed by immediate reconstruction.

Residual breast tissue after robot-assisted nipple sparing mastectomy

Introduction

While the long-term oncologic safety of robot-assisted nipple sparing mastectomy (RNSM) remains to be elucidated, histologically detected residual breast tissue (RBT) can be a surrogate for oncologically sound mastectomy. The objective of this study is to determine the presence of RBT after RNSM.

Methods

Between August 2019–January 2020, we completed 5 cadaveric RNSMs. Full thickness biopsies from the mastectomy skin flap were obtained from predefined locations radially around the mastectomy skin envelop and nipple areolar complex to histologically evaluate for RBT.

Results

The first case was not technically feasible due to inability to obtain adequate insufflation. Five mastectomy flaps were analyzable. The average mastectomy flap thickness was 2.3 mm (range 2–3 mm) and the average specimen weight was 382.72 g (range 146.9–558.3 g). Of 70 total biopsies, RBT was detected in 11 (15.7%) biopsies. Most common location for RBT was in the nipple-areolar complex, with no RBT detected from the peripheral skin flaps.

Conclusions

In this cadaveric study, RNSM is feasible leaving minimal RBT on the mastectomy flap. The most common location for RBT is in the periareolar location consistent with previous published findings after open NSM. Clinical studies are underway to evaluate the safety of RNSM.

•

Robot-assisted nipple sparing mastectomy (RNSM) is technically feasible.

•

Residual breast tissue after RNSM is histologically detected only from the periareolar location.

•

Further clinical trials are underway to determine oncologic safety of RNSM.

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

BACKGROUND

This study discusses the preliminary results of robotic nipple sparing mastectomy (R-NSM) in patients with breast cancer and analyzes the learning curve of the same surgeon in a single medical center.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Patients with breast cancer from a single center who received R-NSM between 2018 to 2020 were recruited for clinical and pathologic tumor characteristics including family history, grade, type of tumor, treatment, and outcome. The learning curve for R-NSM was analyzed by using cumulative sum (CUSUM).

RESULTS

A total of 85 R-NSM procedures from 78 patients were evaluated. In the CUSUM plot analysis of the learning curve, a significant decrease in time for mastectomy, reconstruction, and total operation appeared in the 22nd, 23rd, and 26th procedures, respectively. Patients' body weight, gel implant size, and specimen weight had significant correlations with the time for mastectomy. Four (5.6%) patients had nipple partial ischemia, and 1 (1.4%) had total nipple necrosis. The mean follow-up was 11.4 ± 6.2 months; only 1 patient showed recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Robotic breast surgery is a feasible method with good cosmetic outcome under suitable patient selection. Oncologic safety is not a reason to stop its development.

Transaxillary Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Using a Simplified Endoscopic Approach: Indications, Cosmetic Outcomes and Technical Refinements

BACKGROUND

The increasing demand for further aesthetic outcome improvement in implant-based breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) leads to major novelties, including endoscopic and robotic NSM with the aim to limit scar visibility. In this paper, we report our experience with a novel and simplified surgical approach-single-axillary-incision non-endoscopic NSM and node surgery followed by an endoscopic DTI breast reconstruction-by focusing on reconstructive indications, technical refinements and aesthetic outcomes.

METHODS

Between June 2016 and October 2019, 14 women underwent this novel technique using definitive anatomical silicone gel filled, totaling 20 breasts. Reconstructive evaluation methods were clinically and photography-based assessment. Breast-Q has been used to quantify patient satisfaction. Feasibility and safety data are also provided.

RESULTS

The average follow-up time was 11 months (range 3-42 months). No local-regional recurrence occurred during follow-up. Median operation time was 340 min; mean hospital stay was 4.1 days. The average mastectomy specimen weight was on average 139 g (ranging from 98 to 182 g). The average implant volume for the reconstructed side was 306 cc (ranging from 165 to 550 cc). Patients' satisfaction was high to very high.

CONCLUSION

Authors' experience suggests that non-endoscopic transaxillary NSM, node surgery and endoscopic direct-to-implant breast reconstruction is a valid, oncological safe, aesthetically sound scarless option in breast cancer patients with small to moderate breast size. It should represent the incision of choice in patient with previous breast surgery with scars that may compromise flap/NAC vascularity using traditional NSM incisions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Robotic nipple sparing mastectomy through a single incision: Advantages of starting with posterior dissection

Objectives

Loss of breast, which is an important body marking of women, causes a huge decrease in quality of life (QoL) after treatment. In order to overcome this morbidity and increase QoL, nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been developed. Even though the demand for better cosmetic results has yielded endoscopic nipple sparing mastectomy, limitations like unsuitable optical window and limited manual control of rigid-tip instruments, and struggling to keep dissection space have led robotic nipple sparing mastectomy (rNSM) to be developed.

Material and Methods

Records of three patients who underwent to rNSM for invasive breast carcinoma with DaVinci Xi (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) in affiliated hospitals of xxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxx University, Research Institute of xxxxx in 2018 were investigated retrospectively. In all breasts (n=4), dissection was started from the posterior side of breast.

Results

In the unit, 738 breast cancer patients underwent surgery between 2018 and 2019 with an NSM ratio of 31.4% (n=232). Of these patients, three underwent rNSM with DaVinci Xi robotic system. The operation was performed on the left breast in one patient, right in one, and bilateral in one patient. Only in patient #2, who was a neoadjuvant chemotherapy recipient, seroma was observed six weeks after surgery (3 weeks after removal of drains) and spontaneously resolved in 4 weeks. No other complication was seen in all patients. In the follow-up period of median 21 months, no loco-regional recurrence or distant metastasis was seen.

Conclusion

A single incision robotic mastectomy can be performed easily and safely when the dissection starts from the pre-pectoral plane rather than the subcutaneous plane.

Consensus Statement on Robotic Mastectomy-Expert Panel From International Endoscopic and Robotic Breast Surgery Symposium (IERBS) 2019

OBJECTIVES

To achieve a consensus statement on robotic mastectomy.

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted surgery has gained much attention especially the results of few case series reporting on the technical feasibility, safety and early oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted mastectomy in a few centers worldwide. The aim of this consensus statement was to develop and provide standardized guidelines on robotic mastectomy based on consensus statement by a panel of experts from indications to outcome measures and indicators, thereby providing a valuable guide for breast surgeons worldwide.

METHODOLOGY

An internationally representative expert panel of 10 surgeons was invited to participate in the generation of a consensus statement. 52 statements were created in 6 domains: indications, contraindications, technical considerations, patient counseling, outcome measures and indicators, training and learning curve assessment. Experts were asked to vote if they agree, disagree or of the opinion that the statement should be rephrased. Two electronic rounds via online survey of iterative rating and feedback were anonymously completed, followed by a final round of in-person meeting during the inaugural International Endoscopic and Robotic Breast Surgery Symposium 2019 from May 24 to 25, 2019. Consensus was reached when there was at least 80% agreement on each statement.

RESULTS

A total of 53 statements with at least 80% agreement were generated after 3 rounds of voting; 21 statements from first round of voting, 20 statements from second round of voting and 12 statements from the final round of in-person meeting. All experts agreed that the consensus statement served as expert recommendations but not mandatory for a successful and safe practice of robotic mastectomy.

CONCLUSION

Robotic mastectomy is a promising technique and could well be the future of minimally invasive breast surgery whereas proving to be safe and feasible. The first consensus statement on robotic mastectomy from an international panel of experts serves as an extremely important milestone and provides recommendations for breast surgeons keen to embark on this technique.

Transumbilical Single-port Robotically Assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy: A Cadaveric Study

The authors performed a transumbilical, single-port robotically assisted, nipple-sparing mastectomy on a cadaveric model to assess technical feasibility. Surgeon-controlled, robotic-wristed instrumentation, as well as 3-dimensional high definition (HD) vision allowed the entire dissection to be performed through a single incision placed in the umbilicus. The technique warrants further exploration and development before any application in clinical applied research.

Robotic versus conventional nipple sparing mastectomy and immediate gel implant breast reconstruction in the management of breast cancer- A case control comparison study with analysis of clinical outcome, medical cost, and patient-reported cosmetic results

BACKGROUND

Robotic nipple sparing mastectomy (R-NSM), which uses the da Vinci surgical platform, could perform NSM and immediate breast reconstruction through a small and inconspicuous extra-mammary axillary or lateral chest incision. R-NSM was reported with extremely low nipple areolar complex (NAC) necrosis rate, good cosmetic results, and high patient satisfaction. However, there was little evidence available comparing the effectiveness and safety of R-NSM and conventional NSM (C-NSM) in the management of breast cancer.

METHODS

A case control comparison study was conducted for patients with breast cancer who underwent R-NSM or C-NSM with immediate gel implant breast reconstruction (IGBR) from July 2011 to September 2019 at a single institution to compare the clinical outcomes, patient-reported esthetic results, and medical cost.

RESULTS

According to the study design, 54 procedures of R-NSM were compared with 62 procedures of C-NSM in the surgical management of breast cancer combined with IGBR. Compared with C-NSM, R-NSM was associated with higher overall satisfaction (92% excellent and 8% good versus 75.6% excellent and 24.4% good, P = 0.046), and wound/scar related outcome in patient-reported esthetic results. The NAC ischemia/necrosis risk, overall complication rate, and blood loss were not significantly different between R-NSM and C-NSM groups. However, longer operation time and higher overall medical cost (10,877 ± 796 versus 5,702 ± 661 US Dollars, P<0.01) was observed in R-NSM group.

CONCLUSION

Compared with C-NSM, R-NSM showed comparable clinical outcomes and favorable patients' satisfaction with the esthetic results, but at the price of longer operation time and higher cost.

Robotic- Versus Endoscopic-Assisted Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Prosthesis Breast Reconstruction in the Management of Breast Cancer: A Case-Control Comparison Study with Analysis of Clinical Outcomes, Learning Curve, Patient-Reported Aesthetic Results, and Medical Cost

BACKGROUND

New surgical innovations of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), such as endoscopic NSM (E-NSM) or robotic NSM (R-NSM), were emerging. However, there was a lack of evidence comparing the effectiveness and safety in the management of breast cancer.

METHODS

A case-control comparison study was conducted for patients with breast cancer underwent E-NSM or R-NSM with immediate prosthesis breast reconstruction (IPBR) from July 2010 to February 2019 at a single institution to compare the clinical outcomes, learning curve, patient-reported cosmetic results, and medical cost.

RESULTS

A total of 91 E-NSM and 40 R-NSM procedures were retrieved and analyzed. The surgical margin involvement rate in both R-NSM (2.5%) and E-NSM (4.4%) procedures were relatively low (P = 0.52). The R-NSM group was associated with higher satisfaction rates in terms of scar appearance, scar length, and surgical wound position compared with the E-NSM group. Compared with E-NSM, the R-NSM operation time took longer (241 ± 61 vs. 215 ± 70 min, P = 0.01), less blood loss (32 ± 29 vs. 79 ± 62 ml, P < 0.01), and higher medical cost (10,587 ± 554 vs. 6855 ± 936 U.S. dollars, P < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in nipple ischemia/necrosis or overall complication between R-NSM and E-NSM. In the learning curve analysis, it took the 27th procedure in E-NSM and 10th procedure in R-NSM to decrease operation time significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

R-NSM was associated with higher wound-related satisfaction, lesser blood loss, and shorter learning curve compared with E-NSM, however, at the price of longer operation time and higher medical cost.

Robotic Surgery: A Novel Approach for Breast Surgery and Reconstruction

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in both the US and UK female population, a prominent cause of morbidity and cost to both health services. All surgically fit patients are offered breast reconstruction following the initial surgery, and this is traditionally an open approach: either implant-based or an autologous tissue flap. Both lead to scarring that is difficult to conceal. This paper aims to evaluate the novel minimally invasive technique of robotic-assisted surgery.

Methods:

A systematic review was conducted using Medline (OvidSP) and Embase (OvidSP) to evaluate the current application of robotic-assisted surgery in breast surgery and reconstruction.

Results:

Twenty-one articles were identified and discussed, composing of level 4 and 5 evidence comparing different surgeons' experiences, techniques, and outcomes. To date, the robotic system has been utilized to harvest the latissimus dorsi muscle for use as a tissue flap (total harvest time of 92 minutes), to perform nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (total operation time 85 minutes) and lately to harvest a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap via an intraabdominal approach.

Conclusions:

Robotic-assisted surgery can successfully and reproducibly perform a nipple-sparing mastectomy with breast reconstruction. It can minimize the size of scarring and is superior to the laparoscopic technique, with improved 3-dimensional visualization, dexterity, and range of motion able to guide around the curvature of the breast. The main limiting factors are the lack of the US Food and Drug Administration approval, cost of the robot, and specialized skills required.

Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Prepectoral Implant-Based Reconstruction: A Case Report

Patient: Female, 45-year-old

Final Diagnosis: Prophylactic mastectomy

Symptoms: —

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: —

Specialty: Obstetrics and Gynecology

Nipple-sparing mastectomy combined with endoscopic immediate reconstruction via axillary incision for breast cancer: A preliminary experience of an innovative technique

INTRODUCTION

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has known an exponential diffusion worldwide for prophilaxis and therapeutic mastectomies in selected candidates, being oncologically safe and improving reconstructive outcomes and patients' satisfaction. The two most common used skin incisions are the radial and inframammary fold ones, which represent an imperfect aesthetic solution. The aim of this work was to give insights on our surgical technique, which allows to perform the NSM, node surgery, and endoscopic direct-to-implant reconstruction using a cosmetic axillary incision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between June 2016 and January 2019, 7 consecutive patients underwent NSM, lymph node surgery and endoscopic direct-to-implant reconstruction using a small cosmetic axillary incision for breast cancer treatment in a single Institution. An operative rigid endoscope with working channel (Richard Wolf) was used to dissect the entire submuscular-subfascial pocket. The mean age of the patients was 42.8 years old (range: 36-49 years). The evaluation methods were clinical and photography-based assessments, as well as the BREAST-Q which was used to quantify patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

The average follow-up time was 9 months (range 3-22 months). Tumor-free margins were obtained in all cases. No tumor recurrence or metastasis occurred during follow-up. No major complications were experienced. There were no cases of malposition, wrinkling, or rippling. All patients were satisfied with their esthetic results, especially the absence of visible scars.

CONCLUSIONS

From our preliminary experience, NSM combined with endoscopic immediate reconstruction via axillary incision for breast cancer treatment seems to be a promising new procedure in cup A and B breasts alternative to the conventional techniques, as it allowed to have safe and pleasant aesthetic and oncologic outcomes.

[Mastectomy and immediate reconstruction: Indications, techniques and decision algorithm]

Immediate breast reconstruction indications extend to infiltrating carcinomas, due to new matrix implant coverage techniques and the development of perforator flaps. These techniques allow adjuvant treatments. However, the decision of immediate reconstruction must be discussed with the oncological multidisciplinary team and the benefits/risks must also be evaluated in relation to the morphology of the patients and their co-morbidities. The chosen type of mastectomy: conventional or skin sparing and/or nipple sparing depends on the shape and volume of the breast, the localization of the tumor in the breast and the distance from the nipple areola complex (NAC). We describe an algorithm to allow, in the case of therapeutic mastectomy with or without adjuvant radiotherapy, an immediate reconstruction with implants or free or pedicled flaps.