Breast cancer robotic nipple sparing mastectomy: evaluation of several surgical procedures and learning curve

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.

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.

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.

Robotic-Assisted Nipple Sparing Mastectomy

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

A Preliminary Experience of Endoscopic Total Mastectomy With Immediate Free Abdominal-Based Perforator Flap Reconstruction Using Minimal Incisions, and Literature Review

PURPOSE

Endoscopic total mastectomy (ETM) is predominantly performed with reconstruction using prostheses, lipofilling, omental flaps, latissimus dorsi flaps, or a combination of these techniques. Common approaches include minimal incisions, e.g., periareolar, inframammary, axillary, or mid-axillary line, which limit the technical ability to perform autologous flap insets and microvascular anastomoses, as such the ETM with free abdominal-based perforator flap reconstruction has not been robustly explored.

METHODS

We studied female patients with breast cancer who underwent ETM and abdominal-based flap reconstruction. Clinical-radiological-pathological characteristics, surgery, complications, recurrence rates, and aesthetic outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

Twelve patients underwent ETM with abdominal-based flap reconstruction. The mean age was 53.4 years (range 36-65). Of the patients, 33.3% were surgically treated for stage I, 58.4% for stage II, and 8.3% for stage III cancer. Mean tumor size was 35.4 mm (range 1-67). Mean specimen weight was 458.75 g (range 242-800). Of the patients, 92.3% successfully received endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy and 7.7% underwent intraoperative conversion to skin-sparing mastectomy after carcinoma was reported on frozen section of the nipple base. Mean operative time for ETM was 139 minutes (92-198), and the average ischemic time was 37.3 minutes (range 22-50). Fifty percent of patients underwent deep inferior epigastric perforator, 33.4% underwent MS-2 transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM), 8.3% underwent MS-1 TRAM, and 8.3% underwent pedicled TRAM flap reconstruction. No cases required re-exploration, no flap failure occurred, margins were clear, and no skin or nipple-areolar complex ischemia/necrosis developed. In the aesthetic outcome evaluation, 16.7% were excellent, 75% good, 8.3% fair, and none were unsatisfactory. No recurrences were observed.

CONCLUSION

ETM through a minimal-access inferior mammary or mid-axillary line approach, followed by immediate pedicled TRAM or free abdominal-based perforator flap reconstruction, can be a safe means of achieving an "aesthetically scarless" mastectomy and reconstruction through minimal incisions.

Immediate Breast Reconstruction Using the Autologous Dermal Flap

INTRODUCTION

Despite the development of breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer treatment, there still remain indications for total mastectomy. Since mastectomy has a significant negative impact on the patients' quality of life, breast reconstruction is increasingly popular. However, for patients with large ptotic breasts who do not choose tissue-based reconstruction techniques and prefer implant-based breast reconstruction, there is no single-stage breast reconstruction technique other than the classic technique using Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM).

METHODS

This study presents a novel technique for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy (NSM) and Immediate Breast reconstruction (IBR) in 11 operations (in seven patients) whose treatment decision-making was based on NCCN guidelines. In this technique, the implant/tissue expander is covered by the pectoral muscle in the upper part and an autologous dermal flap in the lower part, replacing an ADM. The dermal flap is created from the de-epithelialized lower mastectomy flap in these large ptotic breasts. Maintaining the nipple-areola complex (NAC) is possible by re-implanting a free nipple split-thickness graft from the NAC of the ipsilateral breast prepared at the beginning of the operation.

RESULTS

All seven patients had large ptotic breasts ranging from C cup to double D in size and grade 2 and higher breast ptosis. The mean BMI of the patients was 28 (range: 26-33). No major complications occurred postoperatively. There were three minor complications, all managed conservatively. Surgical indications were risk reduction surgery in three patients with BRCA mutations and therapeutic in the remaining patients (three multifocal invasive ductal carcinomas and one diffused ductal carcinoma in situ). None of the patients had a previous reduction mammoplasty as preparation for NSM, and all the patients underwent a single operation. No breast tissue remained under the NAC, which is ideal with the NSM technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed technique is excellent for implant-based IBR in patients with large ptotic breasts. It eliminates the use of ADM mesh and reduces the cost and postoperative complication rate associated with ADM. Furthermore, using a free nipple graft technique can eliminate the need for a preparatory mastopexy. This technique can also theoretically reduce the risk of recurrence or new primary breast cancer as there are no remaining ducts beneath the nipple-areola complex.

Analysis of robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy using the da Vinci SP system

BACKGROUND

As patients tend to be diagnosed with breast cancer at an early stage, the demand for better cosmetic outcomes has increased. Several studies revealed that robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) shows favorable outcomes. The aim of the study was to reveal the feasibility of RNSM using the da Vinci single-port (SP) system with a minimal incision, hidden in the arm.

METHODS

From 2018 to 2021, 81 cases (70 patients) were retrospectively reviewed. Clinicopathologic characteristics, operative outcomes, and postoperative complications were evaluated. The operative outcomes were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

The median age was 42 years (range, 26-60 years). Bilateral RNSM was performed in 11 (27.2%) patients. The median size of the initial skin incision was 40 mm (range, 20-55 mm). Immediate reconstruction with direct-to-implant was performed in 54 (66.7%) patients and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps in 15 (18.5%) patients. Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo Classification III occurred in six (7.5%) patients. Patients reconstructed with a DIEP flap had large breasts with more severe ptosis, yet grade III complications did not occur.

CONCLUSIONS

RNSM using the SP system can be applied for curative and risk-reducing mastectomy, regardless of breast size or ptosis grade.

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.

Long-term oncologic safety of immediate reconstructive surgery in patients with invasive breast cancer: a retrospective matched-cohort study

Objective

Immediate reconstruction (IR) is a safe and effective surgical treatment for patients with breast cancer. We aimed to assess the prognosis, aesthetic outcomes, and patient satisfaction of IR compared with breast conservation surgery (BCS) and total mastectomy (TM).

Methods

This retrospective matched-cohort study was conducted between May 2005 and December 2014. We established two cohorts according to the tumor (T) size of breast cancer. In the T≤3cm group, cases (IR) and controls (BCS or TM) were matched for age, pathological tumor size, and pathologic nodal status in a 1:1:1 ratio. In the T>3cm group, cases (IR) and controls (TM) were matched with the same factors and ratio. The primary outcome was the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcome was patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Results

A total of 12,678 breast cancer patients were assessed for eligibility, of which 587 were included (T≤3 cm group: 155 IR vs 155 BCS vs 155 TM; T>3cm group: 61 IR vs 61 TM). In the T≤3 cm cohort, patients who underwent IR had no difference compared with those who underwent BCS or TM regarding the 5-year DFS (P=0.539); however, an improved aesthetic satisfaction, psychosocial, and sexual well-being were achieved in the IR group (P<0.001). In the T>3 cm cohort, the IR group had a worse median 5-year DFS (P=0.044), especially for Her2+ or triple-negative breast carcinoma (TNBC) subtypes compared with the TM group.

Conclusions

IR improves aesthetic satisfaction, psychosocial, and sexual well-being for breast cancer patients with T≤3 cm. For patients with T > 3 cm invasive breast cancer, TM is superior to IR as it predicts a better 5-year DFS.

Efficacy of da Vinci robot-assisted lymph node surgery than conventional axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer - A comparative study

BACKGROUND

da Vinci robot-assisted axillary lymph node dissection (dVALND) can be a minimally invasive technique to minimize post-operative complications.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the clinical efficacy of dVALND in breast cancer (BC) patients for mitigating the postoperative complications than conventional ALND.

METHODS

Total 60 female patients with BC were admitted to our hospitals since September 2018, and these patients segregated into two groups of 30 patients each. Modified radical mastectomy for BC was performed to the patients in both groups. In Group 1 (control group), ALND was performed using conventional mode of axillary lymph node surgery. In Group 2 (Test group), the dVALND was performed using da Vinci robot-assisted surgery. Wound healing, aesthetic effect and patient's satisfaction were evaluated after conventional method and dVALND.

RESULTS

Postoperative complications viz., wound infection (1/30 (3.33%), p < 0.05), fat necrosis (3/30 (10%), p < 0.05) and lymphedema of upper limbs (2/30 (6.67%), p < 0.05) were observed in dVALND than conventional surgery. Local recurrence or metastasis was minimized and overall aesthetic effect not observed during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

dVALND improved the overall patient's quality of life by mitigating postoperative complications than ALND.

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy complication rate compared to traditional nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Breast cancer is worldwide the most common cause of cancer in women and causes the second most common cancer-related death. Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is commonly used in therapeutic and prophylactic settings. Furthermore, (preventive) mastectomies are, besides complications, also associated with psychological and cosmetic consequences. Robotic NSM (RNSM) allows for better visualization of the planes and reducing the invasiveness. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative complication rate of RNSM to NSM. A systematic search was performed on all (R)NSM articles. The primary outcome was determining the overall postoperative complication rate of traditional NSM and RNSM. Secondary outcomes were comparing the specific postoperative complication rates: implant loss, hematoma, (flap)necrosis, infection, and seroma. Forty-nine studies containing 13,886 cases of (R)NSM were included. No statistically significant differences were found regarding postoperative complications (RNSM 3.9%, NSM 7.0%, p = 0.070), postoperative implant loss (RNSM 4.1%, NSM 3.2%, p = 0.523), hematomas (RNSM 4.3%, NSM 2.0%, p = 0.059), necrosis (RNSM 4.3%, NSM 7.4%, p = 0.230), infection (RNSM 8.3%, NSM 4.0%, p = 0.054) or seromas (RNSM 3.0%, NSM 2.0%, p = 0.421). Overall, there are no statistically significant differences in complication rates between NSM and RNSM.

Single-Port Three-Dimensional (3D) Videoscope-Assisted Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in the Management of Breast Cancer: Technique, Clinical Outcomes, Medical Cost, Learning Curve, and Patient-Reported Aesthetic Results from 80 Preliminary Procedures

BACKGROUND

The preliminary results of an innovative surgical technique, which incorporated single-port three-dimensional (3D) videoscope and instruments for endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (E-NSM), were reported.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who underwent single-port 3D E-NSM for breast cancer from August 2018 to September 2020 were analyzed, and the preliminary outcome of this procedure as well as the patient-reported aesthetic results are described in this article.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 70 patients who received 80 procedures of single-port 3D E-NSM. The mean operation time was 158 ± 36 min, and the mean blood loss was 41 ± 26 ml. Three procedures (3.8 %) associated with delayed axillary wound-healing, eight cases of transient nipple ischemia (10 %), three cases of partial nipple ischemia/necrosis (3.7 %), and one case of total nipple-areolar complex (NAC) necrosis (1.3 %) were observed. No patient had margin involvement. Satisfaction rates of approximately 90 % were observed in terms of postoperative scar appearance, location, and length. Most of the patients (87.8 %) reported that they would choose the same operation again if given the chance to do so. The overall cost of a single-port 3D E-NSM was 7522 ± 470 U.S. dollars. According to cumulative sum (CUSUM) plot analysis, about 14 cases were needed for surgeons to familiarize themselves with single-port 3D E-NSM and immediate gel implant reconstruction and to decrease their operation time significantly in the initial learning phase.

CONCLUSION

Single-port 3D E-NSM, a safe, efficient, lower-cost procedure, is associated with a good aesthetic result. It is a promising new technique for breast cancer patients indicated for mastectomy, but long-term oncologic safety follow-up evaluation still is needed.

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.

Mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: Results of a mono-centric 4-years cohort

Introduction

Oncological safety, quality of life and cosmetic outcomes seems to be similar between breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). We report our experience of IBR for consecutive mastectomies realized in a recent period of four years in order to determined immediate surgical results according to type of mastectomy and type of reconstruction, as mains objectives.

Methods

All mastectomies with IBR during years 2016–2019 were included. A retrospective analysis with prospective data collection was performed.

Results

We analyzed 748 IBR: 353 nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSM), 391 skin-sparing mastectomies (SSM) and 4 standard mastectomies, 551 with definitive implant or expanders and 196 with latissimus dorsi-flap (LDF). More NSM were performed during the 2 last years and more LDF were performed for high BMI, high breast cup-size, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy and local recurrence. We realized 111 robotic NSM and 125 robotic LDF. Longer duration of surgery was significantly associated with the robotic procedures.

The overall complications crude rate was 31.4% with 9.9% of re-operations and 5.8% of implant loss. Grade 2–3 complications were significantly associated with smoking. Breast complications occurred in 32.9% of mastectomies with principally skin or nipple-areola-complex suffering or necrosis, hematomas and infections. A predictive score was determined to evaluate risk of complications before surgery.

Conclusion

Mastectomy with IBR seems to be a safe technique with an acceptable complication rate which is increased by tobacco use, high breast cup-size and IBR-type.

•

Mastectomy with immediate breast to determined immediate surgical results.

•

More Nipple Sparing Mastectomy performed during the 2 last years.

•

More Latissimus dorsi-flap performed for high BMI, high breast cup-size, after radiotherapy.

Types of Mastectomies and Immediate Reconstructions for Ipsilateral Breast Local Recurrences

Purpose: Ipsilateral-breast-local-recurrence (ILBLR) is a rare event with little data on immediate-breast-reconstruction (IBR). We report post-operative results of different types of mastectomy for ILBLR with or without IBR performed during a period of 40 months in order to analyze post-operative complications as main objective. Methods: We analyzed mastectomies performed for ILBLR after initial breast conservative treatment from January 2016 to April 2019. The characteristics of patients, surgery, complication rate, postoperative hospitalization have been determined. Results: Of the 207 mastectomies, 32.8% had an IBR: 31 nipple-sparing-mastectomy (NSM) and 37 skin-sparing-mastectomy (SSM) with 37 latissimus-dorsi-flap (LDF) IBR and 31 implant-IBR. Few reconstruction was performed for patients with body-mass-index ≥30 (OR = 0.214), infiltrating ductal carcinomas (OR = 0.272) and ASA-3 patients (OR = 0.254). In multivariate analysis, LDF-IBR was more often realized for NSM and for patients with BMI ≥25. The overall complication rate was 37.4%: 45.6 and 33.1% with and without IBR, respectively (p = 0.056). In multivariate analysis, BMI ≥25 (OR 2.02, p = 0.023), IBR (OR 1.9, p = 0.046) and tobacco (OR 2.17, p = 0.055) were correlated with higher risk of complications. There was no difference for Grade 2-3 complications rates for IBR and no IBR, respectively (14.7%: 10/68 and 9.3%: 13/139). In multivariate analysis, overall survival from date of mastectomy for local recurrence was significantly associated with interval time to local recurrence (OR 6.981). Conclusion: Salvage mastectomy and IBR is a good choice for ILBLR, particularly using flap reconstruction. NSM can be considered as a good option in selected patients for ILBLR for NSM and/or LDFR.

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.

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.

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 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.

Evolution of minimal access breast surgery

Surgical management of breast cancer has been evolving rapidly over the past 20-30 years. Prior to this, conventional surgical options were limited to either a mastectomy or breast conserving surgery. The demand for better aesthetic outcomes had driven the development of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery where glandular rearrangement or replacement coupled with thoughtfully placed incisions became the standard approach to breast conserving surgery. As breast surgeons and patients demand for improved aesthetic outcomes, minimally invasive or minimal access breast surgery has gained much attention over the past two decades, from endoscopic assisted to robotic-assisted breast surgery more recently. However, there has been a lack of review articles discussing this relatively recent but under-reported subset of surgical techniques in the management of breast cancer. This article aims to discuss the concept and development of minimal access breast surgery along with a review of current literature on its indications, techniques and outcome measures as well as a discussion on the strengths, limitations as well as future directions. Continued improvement in techniques and advancement of technology will definitely increase the likelihood of minimal access techniques being placed as the standard of care in the management of breast cancer.