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)

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.

Minimal Access vs Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Importance

While nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) for breast cancer was only performed using the open method in the past, its frequency using endoscopic and robotic surgical instruments has been increasing rapidly. However, there are limited studies regarding postoperative complications and the benefits and drawbacks of minimal access NSM (M-NSM) compared with conventional NSM (C-NSM).

Objective

To examine the differences in postoperative complications between C-NSM and M-NSM.

Design, Setting, Participants

This was a retrospective multicenter cohort study enrolling 1583 female patients aged 19 years and older with breast cancer who underwent NSM at 21 university hospitals in Korea between January 2018 and December 2020. Those with mastectomy without preserving the nipple-areolar complex (NAC), clinical or pathological malignancy in the NAC, inflammatory breast cancer, breast cancer infiltrating the chest wall or skin, metastatic breast cancer, or insufficient medical records were excluded. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to March 2024.

Exposures

M-NSM or C-NSM.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Clinicopathological factors and postoperative complications within 3 months of surgery were assessed. Statistical analyses, including logistic regression, were used to identify the factors associated with complications.

Results

There were 1356 individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.47 [8.56] years) undergoing C-NSM and 227 (mean [SD] age, 45.41 [7.99] years) undergoing M-NSM (35 endoscopy assisted and 192 robot assisted). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding short- and long-term postoperative complications (<30 days: C-NSM, 465 of 1356 [34.29%] vs M-NSM, 73 of 227 [32.16%]; P = .53; <90 days: C-NSM, 525 of 1356 [38.72%] vs M-NSM, 73 of 227 [32.16%]; P = .06). Nipple-areolar complex necrosis was more common in the long term after C-NSM than M-NSM (C-NSM, 91 of 1356 [6.71%] vs M-NSM, 5 of 227 [2.20%]; P = .04). Wound infection occurred more frequently after M-NSM (C-NSM, 58 of 1356 [4.28%] vs M-NSM, 18 of 227 [7.93%]; P = .03). Postoperative seroma occurred more frequently after C-NSM (C-NSM, 193 of 1356 [14.23%] vs M-NSM, 21 of 227 [9.25%]; P = .04). Mild or severe breast ptosis was a significant risk factor for nipple or areolar necrosis (odds ratio [OR], 4.75; 95% CI, 1.66-13.60; P = .004 and OR, 8.78; 95% CI, 1.88-41.02; P = .006, respectively). Conversely, use of a midaxillary, anterior axillary, or axillary incision was associated with a lower risk of necrosis (OR for other incisions, 32.72; 95% CI, 2.11-508.36; P = .01). Necrosis occurred significantly less often in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction compared to other breast reconstructions (OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.11-7.34; P = .03).

Conclusions and Relevance

The similar complication rates between C-NSM and M-NSM demonstrates that both methods were equally safe, allowing the choice to be guided by patient preferences and specific needs.

Single Axillary Incision Reverse Sequence Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in the Management of Gynecomastia: Short-Term Cosmetic Outcomes, Surgical Safety, and Learning Curve of the Preliminary 156 Consecutive Procedures from a Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Currently, a standard, optimal surgical procedure is still lacking for gynecomastia. Despite the development of a variety of surgical interventions, these techniques were often limited to patients with Simon I and II. The present study aimed to introduce a novel technique for all types and grades of gynecomastia, and reported the preliminary results.

METHODS

Patients who received single axillary incision reverse sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-E-NSM) from March 2021 to March 2023 were enrolled at a single institution. The data from 3-month follow-up cut-off were collected prospectively and analyzed to determine the short-term esthetic and safety results of this technique, as well as the learning curve.

RESULTS

A total of 159 single axillary incision reverse sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy procedures were performed in 81 gynecomastia patients. Among these 81 patients, 7 patients (8.6%) were classified as Simon grade I, 29 patients (35.8%) as grade IIa, 24 patients (29.6%) as grade IIb, and 21 patients (25.9%) as grade III. In the patient-reported cosmetic results, the overall satisfaction score was 8.4 ± 1.4. A total of 74.1% of patients were highly satisfied, and 25.9% were satisfied. The overall complication rate was 10.1%, and only 1 patient had a major complication. According to the cumulative sum plot analysis, approximately 12 cases were needed for surgeon B and 11 cases for surgeon C to decrease their operation time significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

R-E-NSM is safe and effective for all Simon grade gynecomastia patients, with excellent cosmetic results and a short learning curve. However, a long-term follow-up assessment is still needed.

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 .

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.

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.

Clinical Outcomes of Transaxillary Reverse-Sequence Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Study of Initial 68 Procedures

BACKGROUND

Minimal access breast surgery improves cosmetic outcomes over conventional breast surgery but still faces barriers in becoming standard procedure for breast reconstruction. This report introduces a novel technique of transaxillary reverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-E-NSM) followed by direct-to-implant prepectoral breast reconstruction (DTI-PBR) and describes its clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled patients who underwent R-E-NSM and DTI-PBR from March 2021 to December 2021 at a single institution. Perioperative data, surgical complications, oncologic outcomes, and patient- and surgeon-reported cosmetic results were noted.

RESULTS

The 60 patients in this study who underwent 68 R-E-NSM and DTI-PBR had a mean age was 40.4 ± 10.3 years. The average durations of uni- and bilateral operations were 156.5 ± 48.3 min and 191.3 ± 36.1 min, respectively. The overall surgical complication rate was 13.3%, including 10.0% of patients with minor complications and 3.3% of patients with major complications. The study had one case (1.7%) of implant loss and one case (1.7%) of skin flap necrosis treated by reoperation. During the median follow-up period of 24 months, one patient (1.7%) who discontinued chemotherapy for myelosuppression experienced liver metastases 5 months postoperatively, and one patient experienced new-onset contralateral ductal carcinoma in situ 24 months postoperatively. The preoperative and 18-month postoperative Breast-Q scores for satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and chest well-being did not differ significantly, and the Scar-Q was 81.2 ± 14.5 points. The good-to-excellent rate in surgeon-reported cosmetic results reached 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

Transaxillary R-E-NSM followed by DTI-PBR is a safe and efficient technique with high cosmetic outcomes and reliable medium-term oncologic results.

Scarless totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) implantation: Surgical technique, preliminary results, learning curve, and patients-reported outcome in 125 breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Minimal-access (endoscopic or robotic-assisted) breast surgery has been increasingly performed and shown better cosmetic results. However, location of totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) for systemic treatment at anterior chest may compromise its aesthetic benefits. Therefore, we proposed a new scarless technique for TIVAP implantation, and reported the preliminary results, learning curve, and patients-surveyed outcome.

METHODS

Surgical technique of the new "scarless" TIVAP implantation was proposed. Patients receiving this procedure in a single institution were included. The preliminary results of the scarless TIVAP implantation, learning curve, and patient-reported outcome were analyzed and reported.

RESULTS

A total of 125 breast cancer patients received scarless TIVAP procedures were enrolled. The primary success rate of the scarless TIVAP implantation was 100%. Mean operative time was 46 ± 14 min. Mean amount of blood loss was 8.5 ± 3.2 ml. The cumulative sum plot showed operation time significantly decreased after 24th cases. In the initial learning phase, the mean operative time was 55 ± 17 min, and decreased to 43 ± 12 min in the later mature phase (P = 0.003). There were 5 (4%) complications detected, which included 1 (0.8%) seroma formation, 2 (1.6%) revisions, and 2 (1.6%) unplanned explantations. From patients-evaluated questionnaires, more than 90% of responders were satisfied with aesthetic results, experience during surgery, and application of scarless TIVAP for systemic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The scarless TIVAP implantation is a safe & reliable procedure with high patients-reported aesthetic satisfaction, and could be an alternative TIVAP procedure for patients requiring chemotherapy and desiring a less noticeable scar.

Gasless robot-assisted transaxillary hemithyroidectomy (RATH): learning curve and complications

PURPOSE

Gasless robot-assisted transaxillary hemithyroidectomy (RATH) is regarded as an alternative surgical option for thyroid operations. However, the associated steep learning curve is a clinical concern. This study evaluated the learning curve of RATH for surgeons without experience of endoscopic surgery and the early surgical outcomes of RATH.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent gasless RATH and conventional hemithyroidectomy (CH) at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China, from June 2021 to August 2022. The learning curve and early surgical outcomes of gasless RATH were evaluated. And the early surgical outcomes of gasless RATH were compared to CH.

RESULTS

In total, 105 patients who underwent gasless RATH and 104 patients who underwent CH were matched and assessed. The cumulative sum techniques (CUSUM) analysis showed that the peak point of gasless RATH operative time occurred at the 31st case. No clear single peak was identified in the CUSUM plot for drainage amount and blood loss. No significant difference in perioperative complications was observed between these two groups. Moreover, the number of postoperative patients who got sense of thyroid area traction were fewer in the gasless RATH group (n = 11, 10.5%) than in the CH group (n = 32, 30.8%).

CONCLUSION

Gasless RATH can be considered as an alternative approach to the conventional open procedure, as it is an easy remote access technique, with shorter learning curves and certain advantage such as less sense of thyroid area traction.

Successful robotic kidney transplantation for surgeons with no experience in minimally invasive surgery: a single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Robotic kidney transplantation (RKT) is a novel and welcomed innovation yielding good surgical outcomes. However, data on the feasibility and safety of performing RKT by surgeons with a lack of prior minimally invasive surgery (MIS) experience are limited. The authors aimed to evaluate the surgical and functional results of RKT and present the learning curves (LC) of RKT by a single surgeon with no prior experience in MIS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all RKT performed between November 2019 and April 2023 at Severance Hospital in Seoul, South Korea. The authors analyzed surgical and functional outcomes, as well as complication rates of RKT in comparison to open kidney transplantation (OKT). The authors evaluated LCs using the cumulative summation method to describe the number of cases associated with the competency of a single surgeon.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients who underwent RKT and 104 patients who underwent OKT were included in this study. In RKT group, the median surgical console time was 193 min (interquartile range, 172-222) and the median vascular anastomoses time was 38 min (35-44). Total operation time was 323 min (290-371) and rewarming time was 62.5 min (56.0-70.0) in RKT group compared to 210 min (190-239) and 25 min (21-30), respectively, in OKT group. Despite extended surgical durations with a robotic technique, both groups had comparable intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as renal function. Estimated blood loss and post-transplant hospital stays were significantly lower in RKT group than in OKT group. LC analysis of RKT by the single surgeon revealed that surgical competence was achieved after 15 cases.

CONCLUSION

Even if surgeons do not have prior experience with MIS, they can rapidly overcome the LC and safely perform RKT with adequate preparation and acquisition of basic robotic surgical techniques.

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.

Counselling Framework for Germline BRCA1/2 and PALB2 Carriers Considering Risk-Reducing Mastectomy

Female BRCA1/2 and PALB2 germline pathogenic variant carriers have an increased lifetime risk of breast cancer and may wish to consider risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) for surgical prevention. Quantifying the residual lifetime risk and absolute benefit from RRM requires careful consideration of a patient's age, pathogenic variant, and their personal history of breast or ovarian cancer. Historically, patients have been counselled that RRM does not necessarily prolong survival relative to high-risk surveillance, although recent studies suggest a possible survival benefit of RRM in BRCA1 carriers. The uptake of RRM has increased dramatically over the last several decades yet varies according to sociodemographic factors and geographic region. The increased adoption of nipple-sparing mastectomy techniques, ability to avoid axillary staging, and availability of reconstructive options for most germline pathogenic variant carriers has helped to minimize the morbidity of RRM. Preoperative discussions should include evidence regarding postmastectomy sensation, the potential for supplemental surgery, pregnancy-related chest wall changes, and the need for continued clinical surveillance. Approaches that include sensation preservation and robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy are an area of evolving research that may be more widely adopted in the future.

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.

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.

Single axillary incision reverse-order endoscopic nipple/skin-sparing mastectomy followed by subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: Technique, clinical outcomes, and aesthetic results from 88 preliminary procedures

BACKGROUND

Single axillary incision reverse-order endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy overcomes the limitations of conventional endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy application. We introduce this technique and report the preliminary results of this study.

METHODS

Patients who received single axillary incision reverse-order endoscopic nipple-/skin-sparing mastectomy from May 2020 to May 2022 were enrolled from a single institution. Data were analyzed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of this technique. Patient-reported and surgeon-reported cosmetic outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

In total, 68 patients who underwent 88 single axillary incision reverse-order endoscopic nipple-/skin-sparing mastectomy combined with subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction were enrolled in the current study. The overall complication rate was 10.3%. In total, 2.9% of patients suffered from major complications, and 5 (7.4%) experienced minor complications. Only 1 patient experienced partial nipple-areola complex necrosis. During a median follow-up time of 24 months, the locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis rate was both 1.6%. In the surgeon-reported cosmetic results, 92.1% of patients achieved good or excellent results. The mean SCAR-Q scores were 82.07 ± 8.86, and 85.3% evaluated their breasts as good or excellent. The mean overall cost was 5,670.4 ± 1,351.3 USD. The total mean operation time and maturity-stage mean operation time were 234.3 ± 80.4 and 172.55 ± 41.29 min, respectively. According to cumulative sum plot analysis, approximately 18 cases were needed for surgeons to decrease their operation time significantly and complication rate.

CONCLUSION

Single axillary incision reverse-order endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy is a safe, less expensive, and efficient surgical technique with reliable intermediate-term oncologic safety. For suitable candidates, the technique with subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction can provide a good cosmetic outcome.

Robotics in Implant-Based and Autologous Breast Reconstruction

Autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction continues to evolve as new technology and mastectomy techniques become available. Robotic-assisted breast reconstruction represents a growing field within plastic surgery, with the potential to improve aesthetic and functional outcomes, as well as patient satisfaction. This article provides a review of indications, techniques, and outcome data supporting the use of robotic assistance in both implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction from surgeons around the world.

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.

Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Evaluating Residual Breast Tissue After Robotic-Assisted Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in Women With Early Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Prospective studies on postoperative residual breast tissue (RBT) after robotic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM) for breast cancer are limited. RBT presents an unknown risk of local recurrence or the development of new cancer after curative or risk-reducing mastectomies. This study investigated the technical feasibility of using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to evaluate RBT after R-NSM in women with breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective pilot study, 105 patients, who underwent R-NSM for breast cancer at Changhua Christian Hospital between March 2017 and May 2022, were subjected to postoperative breast MRI to evaluate the presence and location of RBT. The postoperative MRI scans of 43 patients (age, 47.8 ± 8.5 years), with existing preoperative MRI scans, were evaluated for the presence and location of RBT. In total, 54 R-NSM procedures were performed. In parallel, we reviewed the literature on RBT after nipple-sparing mastectomy, considering its prevalence.

RESULTS

RBT was detected in 7 (13.0%) of the 54 mastectomies (6 of the 48 therapeutic mastectomies and 1 of the 6 prophylactic mastectomies). The most common location for RBT was behind the nipple-areolar complex (5 of 7 [71.4%]). Another RBT was found in the upper inner quadrant (2 of 7 [28.6%]). Among the six patients who underwent RBT after therapeutic mastectomies, one patient developed a local recurrence of the skin flap. The other five patients with RBT after therapeutic mastectomies remained disease-free.

CONCLUSION

R-NSM, a surgical innovation, does not seem to increase the prevalence of RBT, and breast MRI showed feasibility as a noninvasive imaging tool for evaluating the presence and location of RBT.

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.

Early experience of robotic axillary lymph node dissection in patients with node-positive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgical systems enable surgeons to perform precise movement in the surgical field using high-resolution 3D vision and flexible robotic instruments. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of performing axillary lymph node dissection using a robotic surgical system in patients with node-positive breast cancer.

METHODS

Thirty-two women with breast cancer who underwent robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) and level I/II axillary lymph node dissection were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: RNSM with conventional axillary lymph node dissection (CALND) vs. RNSM with robotic axillary lymph node dissection (RALND). Clinicopathological features and surgical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 44 (range 20-59) years. Eleven patients underwent RALND. None of the clinicopathologic features differed between the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences in surgical outcomes, except for the final incision size, between the two groups. The proportion of cases with an incision ≤ 40 mm was 63.6% in the RALND group and 36.4% in the CALND group (p = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

RALND can be safely performed in RNSM. RNSM with RALND is comparable to RNSM with CALND in terms of early surgical outcomes. The incision size can be reduced when using RALND.

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.

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.

From cadaveric and animal studies to the clinical reality of robotic mastectomy: a feasibility report of training program

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) provides better cosmetic outcomes and improves the quality of life of women with breast cancer. However, this has not been widely adapted due to the lack of well-structured training programs. The present study aimed to report the establishment of cadaveric and animal skill laboratory training programs for RNSM and the participants’ perception on the training programs. We performed 24 RNSMs using 11 cadavers and one porcine model. Then, the skill laboratory characteristics were reviewed. Five trainers and 10 trainees participated in the programs. The first four cadaveric RNSMs with latissimus dorsi flaps and implants were performed using the da Vinci Si® system. We performed 14 and six RNSMs using the Xi® and SP® systems, respectively. The scores for questionnaires on the satisfaction with the training consisted of the trainees’ perceived goals in attending the course, teaching/learning environment, and teaching staff performance. The scores were excellent. Cadaveric or porcine RNSM skill laboratory training may be essential programs that can provide safe and efficient training.

Application of robots in general surgery

Background: Application of robotic surgery in the field of general surgery has been increasing. This paper is an overview of the current uses and future perspectives of robotic surgery in four major divisions—endocrine, upper gastrointestinal, hepato-biliary-pancreatic (HBP), and colorectal surgery.Current Concepts: In endocrine surgery, cosmetic advantage is the highest priority when selecting a surgical approach for thyroidectomy. Currently, the transaxillary route is the most common approach. The introduction of the single-port system could maximize the advantages of this technique. In upper gastrointestinal surgery, the use of robots has the advantage of better retrieval of lymph nodes, less bleeding, earlier discharge, and less complications than the laparoscopic approach. However, a more prospective comparative trial is required to confirm those findings. In the HBP field, the indications of robotic surgery have expanded, starting with cholecystectomy to more challenging procedures, such as donor hepatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy. Meticulous dissection using robots could provide benefits to patients. In colorectal surgery, robotic surgery is an excellent technical tool for minimally invasive surgeries for rectal cancers, especially in male patients with narrow, deep pelvises. However, further studies are required to confirm the impact of robotic surgery on rectal cancers.Discussion and Conclusion: Robots are used to provide optimal surgical outcomes. Investigating new technologies and innovative surgical procedures is the highly important for a surgeon in the era of minimally invasive surgery.

Robot-assisted breast reconstruction using the prepectoral anterior tenting method

PURPOSE

Prosthetic breast reconstruction in the prepectoral plane with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) support has been gaining popularity and the use of robotic assistance could enhance this procedure. This study introduces robot-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction using the anterior tenting method.

METHODS

Sixteen patients (16 breasts) undergoing surgery from July 2019 to April 2020 were included in this study. The breast oncology team performed mastectomies with direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstruction using the da Vinci Xi^TM (Intuitive Surgical Corp., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) system. The prepectoral plane anterior tenting method using ADM was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 16 patients, 14 underwent a nipple-sparing mastectomy and two underwent a skin-sparing mastectomy. The average patient age was 44.9 years, body mass index (BMI) was 22.9 kg/m², and mastectomy weight was 367.6 g. The breast oncology team had an average operating time of 194.7 minutes, and the plastic surgery team had an average operating time of 80.8 minutes. The average postoperative drainage was 943.6 mL, and minor complications occurred in two patients.

CONCLUSION

With the robot, only a small incision of approximately 4.5 cm is necessary and areas that are not readily visible, such as the side of the axilla, can be accessed during the surgery. Using a smaller ADM size, the implant pocket under the ADM can be easily created under a magnified view. Inframammary fold (IMF) restoration is also possible with robotic surgery and delayed bleeding from the pocket can be easily controlled.