Combined Application of a Novel Robotic System and Exoscope for Microsurgical Anastomoses: Preclinical Performance

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The concept of robotic microsurgery is becoming increasingly known as several robotic systems tailored to the specific needs of microsurgery are being introduced. Training with these devices is essential to draw conclusions about their potential clinical utility. This study describes the training and learning curve of experienced microsurgeons and complete novices using such a robotic surgical system in combination with an exoscope.

Methods Four experienced microsurgeons and three complete novices performed a total of 62 manual and robot-assisted anastomoses. The time for anastomosis completion and surgeon's satisfaction with the anastomosis and with the robotic system were recorded. The anastomoses' quality was assessed using the Structured Assessment of Microsurgery Skills (SAMS) and the Anastomosis Lapse Index (ALI). The Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) was used for ergonomics evaluation.

Results All expert microsurgeons and novices improved their performance during training. The average anastomosis time decreased significantly, while satisfaction with the anastomosis and robotic system increased significantly over time. Multiple SAMS score parameters increased significantly throughout robotic but not manual training and the ALI score demonstrated more errors in the manual group. The REBA score displayed a significantly lower risk for musculoskeletal disorders in the robotic group.

Conclusion Currently, the first clinical applications of robotic surgical systems specifically designed for microsurgery are being reported. The introduction of such systems into clinical practice can be expected to have a steep learning curve, as demonstrated in our study. Meanwhile, robotic systems for microsurgical procedures may hold great potential for improvement of surgical quality and ergonomics.

Publication History

Received: 26 March 2023

Accepted: 31 July 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
26 October 2023

Article published online:
23 November 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

• References

• 1 Winocour S, Tarassoli S, Chu CK, Liu J, Clemens MW, Selber JC. Comparing outcomes of robotically assisted latissimus dorsi harvest to the traditional open approach in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 146 (06) 1221-1225
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Selber JC. The robotic DIEP flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 145 (02) 340-343
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Choi JH, Song SY, Park HS. et al. Robotic DIEP flap harvest through a totally extraperitoneal approach using a single-port surgical robotic system. Plast Reconstr Surg 2021; 148 (02) 304-307
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Gundlapalli VS, Ogunleye AA, Scott K. et al. Robotic-assisted deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap abdominal harvest for breast reconstruction: a case report. Microsurgery 2018; 38 (06) 702-705
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Toesca A, Peradze N, Galimberti V. et al. Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with implant: first report of surgical technique. Ann Surg 2017; 266 (02) e28-e30
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Lai HW, Chen ST, Lin SL. et al. Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with gel implant: technique, preliminary results and patient-reported cosmetic outcome. Ann Surg Oncol 2019; 26 (01) 42-52
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Sarfati B, Struk S, Leymarie N. et al. Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction: surgical technique. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 142 (03) 624-627
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Joo OY, Song SY, Park HS, Roh TS. Single-port robot-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction with the da Vinci SP Surgical System: first clinical report. Arch Plast Surg 2021; 48 (02) 194-198
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Kuo WL, Huang JJ, Huang YT. et al. Robot-assisted mastectomy followed by immediate autologous microsurgical free flap reconstruction: techniques and feasibility in three different breast cancer surgical scenarios. Clin Breast Cancer 2020; 20 (01) e1-e8
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Huang JJ, Chuang EYH, Cheong DCF, Kim BS, Chang FCS, Kuo WL. Robotic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate microsurgical free flap reconstruction: Feasibility and aesthetic results - case series. Int J Surg 2021; 95: 106143
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 van Mulken TJM, Schols RM, Scharmga AMJ. et al. First-in-human robotic supermicrosurgery using a dedicated microsurgical robot for treating breast cancer-related lymphedema: a randomized pilot trial. Nat Commun 2020; 11 (01) 757
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Lindenblatt N, Grünherz L, Wang A. et al. Early experience using a new robotic microsurgical system for lymphatic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2022; 10 (01) e4013
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Aitzetmüller MM, Klietz M-L, Dermietzel AF, Hirsch T, Kückelhaus M. Robotic-assisted microsurgery and its future in plastic surgery. J Clin Med 2022; 11 (12) 3378
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Will PA, Hirche C, Berner JE, Kneser U, Gazyakan E. Lymphovenous anastomoses with three-dimensional digital hybrid visualization: improving ergonomics for supermicrosurgery in lymphedema. Arch Plast Surg 2021; 48 (04) 427-432
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 van Mulken TJM, Boymans CAEM, Schols RM. et al. Preclinical experience using a new robotic system created for microsurgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 142 (05) 1367-1376
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Chan W, Niranjan N, Ramakrishnan V. Structured assessment of microsurgery skills in the clinical setting. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010; 63 (08) 1329-1334
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Ghanem AM, Al Omran Y, Shatta B, Kim E, Myers S. Anastomosis Lapse Index (ALI): a validated end product assessment tool for simulation microsurgery training. J Reconstr Microsurg 2016; 32 (03) 233-241
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Hignett S, McAtamney L. Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA). Appl Ergon 2000; 31 (02) 201-205
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Dermietzel A, Aitzetmüller M, Klietz M-L. et al. Free flap breast reconstruction using a novel robotic microscope. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2022; 75 (07) 2387-2440
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Ballestín A, Malzone G, Menichini G, Lucattelli E, Innocenti M. New robotic system with wristed microinstruments allows precise reconstructive microsurgery: preclinical study. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29 (12) 7859-7867
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 van Mulken TJM, Wolfs JAGN, Qiu SS. et al. One-year outcomes of the first human trial on robot-assisted lymphaticovenous anastomosis for breast cancer-related lymphedema. Plast Reconstr Surg 2022; 149 (01) 151-161
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Barbon C, Grünherz L, Uyulmaz S, Giovanoli P, Lindenblatt N. Exploring the learning curve of a new robotic microsurgical system for microsurgery. JPRAS Open 2022; 34: 126-133
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Innocenti M, Malzone G, Menichini G. First-in-human free flap tissue reconstruction using a dedicated microsurgical robotic platform. Plast Reconstr Surg 2023; 151 (05) 1078-1082
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar