Matthew W Kelecy, Noama Iftekhar, Brett Allen, Edozie Ezeanolue, Richard C Baynosa
{"title":"Robot-assisted Pelvic Reconstruction Using Rectus Abdominis Flap: Efficiency Evaluation of Adding a Third Surgeon.","authors":"Matthew W Kelecy, Noama Iftekhar, Brett Allen, Edozie Ezeanolue, Richard C Baynosa","doi":"10.1097/GOX.0000000000006508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The open rectus abdominis flap has long been a versatile workhorse in pelvic reconstruction. In an effort to reduce morbidity of open approach, robotic harvest techniques have been developed. Our institution previously published a retrospective study that compared outcomes between the robotic and open approaches between 2014 and 2019. Since then, our technique has evolved to include the addition of a general surgeon for simultaneous harvest site closure and flap insetting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is an institutional review board-approved single-institution retrospective review of patients who underwent robotic rectus harvest using Da Vinci surgical system for perineal reconstruction between 2018 and June 2023. The dataset was stratified into patients who underwent 3-surgeon reconstruction versus 2-surgeon reconstruction. Data collected included demographics, risk factors, perioperative information, and postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 21 patients underwent robotic rectus repair from 2018 to 2023 with operations occurring at 3 different hospitals. Of those patients 7 were excluded, resulting in 14 patients included for evaluation: 8 patients who underwent 3-surgeon operation and 6 in the 2-surgeon cohort. We found no difference in total operative time (508.1 versus 506.8, <i>P</i> = 0.48), total robotic console time (445.7 versus 424.0, <i>P</i> = 0.46), hospital length of stay (11.4 versus 8.0, <i>P</i> = 0.27), or overall complication rate (0.75 versus 0.83, <i>P</i> = 0.36).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although this is a small study, the data suggest that plastic surgeons trained in robotic techniques are well-equipped to perform the harvest, mesh repair, and flap inset without the addition of a general surgeon.</p>","PeriodicalId":20149,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","volume":"13 2","pages":"e6508"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11798373/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000006508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The open rectus abdominis flap has long been a versatile workhorse in pelvic reconstruction. In an effort to reduce morbidity of open approach, robotic harvest techniques have been developed. Our institution previously published a retrospective study that compared outcomes between the robotic and open approaches between 2014 and 2019. Since then, our technique has evolved to include the addition of a general surgeon for simultaneous harvest site closure and flap insetting.
Methods: This is an institutional review board-approved single-institution retrospective review of patients who underwent robotic rectus harvest using Da Vinci surgical system for perineal reconstruction between 2018 and June 2023. The dataset was stratified into patients who underwent 3-surgeon reconstruction versus 2-surgeon reconstruction. Data collected included demographics, risk factors, perioperative information, and postoperative outcomes.
Results: In total, 21 patients underwent robotic rectus repair from 2018 to 2023 with operations occurring at 3 different hospitals. Of those patients 7 were excluded, resulting in 14 patients included for evaluation: 8 patients who underwent 3-surgeon operation and 6 in the 2-surgeon cohort. We found no difference in total operative time (508.1 versus 506.8, P = 0.48), total robotic console time (445.7 versus 424.0, P = 0.46), hospital length of stay (11.4 versus 8.0, P = 0.27), or overall complication rate (0.75 versus 0.83, P = 0.36).
Conclusions: Although this is a small study, the data suggest that plastic surgeons trained in robotic techniques are well-equipped to perform the harvest, mesh repair, and flap inset without the addition of a general surgeon.
背景:开放式腹直肌皮瓣长期以来一直是盆腔重建的一种多功能的主力。为了降低开放性手术的发病率,机器人手术技术已经得到了发展。我们的机构之前发表了一项回顾性研究,比较了2014年至2019年机器人和开放方法的结果。从那时起,我们的技术已经发展到包括增加一个普通外科医生同时收获部位关闭和皮瓣插入。方法:这是一项机构审查委员会批准的单机构回顾性审查,涉及2018年至2023年6月期间使用达芬奇手术系统进行会阴重建的机器人直肌切除患者。数据集被分层分为接受3次手术重建和2次手术重建的患者。收集的数据包括人口统计学、危险因素、围手术期信息和术后结果。结果:2018年至2023年,共有21名患者在3家不同的医院接受了机器人直肌修复手术。在这些患者中,有7名患者被排除在外,结果有14名患者被纳入评估:8名患者接受了3名外科医生的手术,6名患者接受了2名外科医生的手术。我们发现总手术时间(508.1 vs 506.8, P = 0.48)、机器人总操作台时间(445.7 vs 424.0, P = 0.46)、住院时间(11.4 vs 8.0, P = 0.27)或总并发症发生率(0.75 vs 0.83, P = 0.36)均无差异。结论:虽然这是一项小型研究,但数据表明,接受过机器人技术培训的整形外科医生在没有普通外科医生的情况下,可以很好地完成手术收获、网状修复和皮瓣植入。
期刊介绍:
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open is an open access, peer reviewed, international journal focusing on global plastic and reconstructive surgery.Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open publishes on all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including basic science/experimental studies pertinent to the field and also clinical articles on such topics as: breast reconstruction, head and neck surgery, pediatric and craniofacial surgery, hand and microsurgery, wound healing, and cosmetic and aesthetic surgery. Clinical studies, experimental articles, ideas and innovations, and techniques and case reports are all welcome article types. Manuscript submission is open to all surgeons, researchers, and other health care providers world-wide who wish to communicate their research results on topics related to plastic and reconstructive surgery. Furthermore, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open, a complimentary journal to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, provides an open access venue for the publication of those research studies sponsored by private and public funding agencies that require open access publication of study results. Its mission is to disseminate high quality, peer reviewed research in plastic and reconstructive surgery to the widest possible global audience, through an open access platform. As an open access journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open offers its content for free to any viewer. Authors of articles retain their copyright to the materials published. Additionally, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open provides rapid review and publication of accepted papers.