Roboter-assistierte Mikrochirurgie in der Rekonstruktion der unteren Extremität

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund In den letzten Jahren wurden verschiedene Robotersysteme entwickelt und zugelassen, welche spezifisch für die Mikrochirurgie konzipiert wurden. Bisher gibt es zu diesen Systemen nur wenig Evidenz. In unserer Studie untersuchen wir den Einsatz robotisch assistierter Mikrochirurgie in der mikrochirurgischen Rekonstruktion der unteren Extremität.

Patienten/Material und Methoden Die Daten wurden prospektiv zwischen Februar und November 2023 erfasst. Das Symani-Robotersystem wurde bei 42 mikrochirurgische Eingriffe an der unteren Extremität verwendet und die Ergebnisse ausgewertet.

Ergebnisse Das Durchschnittsalter der Patienten betrug 57±18 Jahre. Es wurden insgesamt 39 freie Lappenplastiken (95%), ein lymphchirurgischer Eingriff (3%) und zwei Nerventransfers (5%) durchgeführt. Insgesamt wurden 46 Anastomosen und Nervenkoaptationen durchgeführt. Hierbei wurden sechs arterielle End-zu-End-Anastomosen (11%), sieben arterielle End-zu-Seit Anastomosen (13%), 36 venöse End-zu-End-Anastomosen (65%), zwei lymphovenöse Anastomosen (4%) und fünf epineurale Koaptationen im Rahmen von Nerventransfers (9%) durchgeführt. Arterielle End-zu-End-Anastomosen dauerten durchschnittlich 26±12 Minuten und arterielle End-zu-Seit-Anastomosen benötigten 42±21 Minuten. Die venösen Anastomosen dauerten im Durchschnitt 33±12 Minuten. Die Nervenkoaptation benötigten im Mittel 24±13 Minuten. In keinem Eingriff war eine Konversion auf die konventionelle Handnaht notwendig. Es kam zu zwei arteriellen Thrombosen (5%). In einem Fall konnte eine erfolgreiche Revision die Lappenplastik retten. Es gab einen totalen Lappenverlust, jedoch keine partiellen Lappenverluste.

Schlussfolgerung Wir konnten unter Verwendung des Symani-Robotersystems in der mikrochirurgischen Rekonstruktion der unteren Extremität Ergebnisse aufzeigen, welche mit der konventionellen Mikrochirurgie vergleichbar sind.

Abstract

Background In recent years, various robotic systems specifically designed for microsurgical tasks have been developed and approved. There is not much evidence for these systems to date. In our study, we examined the use of robot-assisted microsurgery in the reconstruction of the lower extremity.

Patients/Material and Methods Data was prospectively collected between February and November 2023. The Symani robotic system was used in 42 robot-assisted microsurgical procedures on the lower extremity, and the results were evaluated and documented.

Results The average age of the patients was 57±18 years. A total of 39 free flap reconstructions (95%), one lymphatic surgical procedure (3%) and two nerve transfers (5%) were performed. In total, 46 anastomoses and coaptations were carried out. This included six arterial end-to-end anastomoses (11%), seven arterial end-to-side anastomoses (13%), 36 venous end-to-end anastomoses (65%), two lymphovenous anastomoses (4%), and five epineural coaptations in the context of nerve transfers (9%). Arterial end-to-end anastomoses took an average of 26±12 minutes, and arterial end-to-side anastomoses took 42±21 minutes. The venous anastomoses took an average of 33±12 minutes. Epineural coaptations took an average of 24±13 minutes. In no procedure was there a need for a conversion to conventional hand suturing. There were two arterial thromboses (5%), one of which was successfully revised to save the flap. One total flap loss occurred, but there were no partial flap losses.

Conclusion Using the Symani robotic system for microsurgical reconstruction of the lower extremity, we were able to demonstrate results that are comparable to conventional microsurgery.

^* Geteilte Erstautorenschaft

Publication History

Received: 01 December 2023

Accepted: 13 January 2024

Article published online:
22 March 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

• Literatur

• 1 Kwoh YS, Hou J, Jonckheere EA. et al. A robot with improved absolute positioning accuracy for CT guided stereotactic brain surgery. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 1988; 35: 153-160 DOI: 10.1109/10.1354.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S. et al. One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 1997; 84: 695
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Shah J, Vyas A, Vyas D. The History of Robotics in Surgical Specialties. Amer J Robot Surg 2014; 1: 12-20 DOI: 10.1166/ajrs.2014.1006.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 van der Hulst R, Sawor J, Bouvy N. Microvascular anastomosis: is there a role for robotic surgery?. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery 2007; 60: 101-102 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2006.05.011.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 van Mulken TJM, Boymans CAEM, Schols RM. et al. Preclinical Experience Using a New Robotic System Created for Microsurgery. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2018; 142: 1367-1376 DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000004939.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Kueckelhaus M, Kolbenschlag J, Kirschniak A. et al. Neue Technologien in der Mikrochirurgie: Potential, Indikationen und ökonomische Aspekte – Konsensus-Bericht der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Mikrochirurgie der peripheren Nerven und Gefäße (DAM). Handchirurgie · Mikrochirurgie · Plastische Chirurgie 2022; DOI: 10.1055/a-1942-6510.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of Surgical Complications. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 205-213 DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Zenn MR, Jones G. Reconstructive Surgery: Anatomy, Technique, and Clinical Application. Boca Raton, FL, USA: Taylor and Francis; 2012
  Google Scholar
• 9 Stranix JT, Lee Z-H, Jacoby A. et al. Forty Years of Lower Extremity Take-Backs. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2018; 141: 1282-1287 DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000004322.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Xiong L, Gazyakan E, Kremer T. et al. Free flaps for reconstruction of soft tissue defects in lower extremity: A meta-analysis on microsurgical outcome and safety: Microsurgical Lower Extremity Reconstruction. Microsurgery 2016; 36: 511-524 DOI: 10.1002/micr.30020.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Chen K-T, Mardini S, Chuang DC-C. et al. Timing of Presentation of the First Signs of Vascular Compromise Dictates the Salvage Outcome of Free Flap Transfers. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2007; 120: 187 DOI: 10.1097/01.prs.0000264077.07779.50.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Barbon C, Grünherz L, Uyulmaz S. et al. Exploring the learning curve of a new robotic microsurgical system for microsurgery. JPRAS Open 2022; 34: 126-133 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpra.2022.09.002.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Innocenti M, Malzone G, Menichini G. First-in-Human Free Flap Tissue Reconstruction Using a Dedicated Microsurgical Robotic Platform. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2023; 151: 1078-1082 DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000010108.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Wessel KJ, Wendenburg I, Gorji S. et al. Combined Application of a Novel Robotic System and Exoscope for Microsurgical Anastomoses: Preclinical Performance. J Reconstr Microsurg Open 2023; 08: e88-e96 DOI: 10.1055/a-2199-2584.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Lindenblatt N, Grünherz L, Wang A. et al. Early Experience Using a New Robotic Microsurgical System for Lymphatic Surgery. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open 2022; 10: e4013 DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004013.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Beier JP, Hackenberg S, Boos AM. et al. First Series of Free Flap Reconstruction Using a Dedicated Robotic System in a Multidisciplinary Microsurgical Center. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open 2023; 11: e5240 DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005240.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 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. Nature Communications 2020; 11: 757 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-14188-w.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Boys JA, Alicuben ET, DeMeester MJ. et al. Public perceptions on robotic surgery, hospitals with robots, and surgeons that use them. Surg Endosc 2016; 30: 1310-1316 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4368-6.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Henn D, Trotsyuk AA, Barrera JA. et al. Robotics in Plastic Surgery: It’s Here. Plast Reconstr Surg 2023; 152: 239-249 DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010270.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Weinzierl A, Barbon C, Gousopoulos E. et al. The benefits of robotic-assisted lymphatic microsurgery in deeper anatomical planes. JPRAS Open 2023; DOI: 10.1016/j.jpra.2023.07.001.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar