Abstract: Background: Robotically assisted latissimus dorsi harvest permits harvest of the latissimus dorsi muscle without a back incision, as compared to the traditional open technique. The authors hypothesized that robotic harvest has lower donor-site complication rates, decreased opioid requirements, and a shorter length of stay than the traditional open technique.
Methods: A retrospective review was performed of all consecutive pedicled latissimus dorsi flaps for breast reconstruction between 2011 and 2015. All procedures were conducted by two surgeons who performed both robotic and open cases.
Results: Fifty-two patients were identified; 25 underwent robotically assisted latissimus dorsi harvest and 27 underwent the open technique. Demographic data between the two groups were similar. Median length of stay for robotic harvest was shorter than that for the traditional technique (2 days versus 3 days; p = 0.031). Postoperative morphine requirement was less in the robotic compared to the traditional technique, but the difference was not significant (158 mg versus 184 mg; p = 0.826). Seroma rate was higher in the robotic group (16 percent versus 0 percent; p = 0.034). The mean duration of surgery was longer in the robotic cohort (388 minutes versus 311 minutes; p = 0.002).
Conclusions: This study demonstrates robotically assisted latissimus dorsi harvest as an effective alternative to the traditional open technique in select patients. Advantages of robotic harvest include no back scar, a shorter length of stay, and lower opioid requirements, although the difference was not significant; disadvantages include longer operative time and a higher seroma rate.
Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Therapeutic, III.
References: Tansini I. Sopra il mio nuovo processo di amputazione della mammella. Gazz Med Ital. 1906; 57:141.
Fine NA, Orgill DP, Pribaz JJ. Early clinical experience in endoscopic-assisted muscle flap harvest. Ann Plast Surg. 1994; 33:465–469. discussion 469–472.
Selber JC. Robotic latissimus dorsi muscle harvest. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011; 128:88e–90e.
Selber JC, Baumann DP, Holsinger CF. Robotic harvest of the latissimus dorsi muscle: Laboratory and clinical experience. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2012; 28:457–464.
Selber JC, Baumann DP, Holsinger FC. Robotic latissimus dorsi muscle harvest: A case series. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012; 129:1305–1312.
Chung JH, You HJ, Kim HS, Lee BI, Park SH, Yoon ES. A novel technique for robot assisted latissimus dorsi flap harvest. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015; 68:966–972.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/prescribing/guideline.html. Accessed July 21, 2019.
Selber JC. Spiegel A. Robotic harvest of the latissimus dorsi muscle for breast reconstruction. In: Breast Reconstruction: Current Perspectives and State of the Art Techniques. 2013, London: InTechOpen99–112.
Clemens MW, Kronowitz S, Selber JC. Robotic-assisted latissimus dorsi harvest in delayed-immediate breast reconstruction. Semin Plast Surg. 2014; 28:20–25.
Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC. Enhanced recovery after surgery: A review. JAMA Surg. 2017; 152:292–298.
Melnyk M, Casey RG, Black P, Koupparis AJ. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols: Time to change practice?. Can Urol Assoc J. 2011; 5:342–348.
McCombie AM, Frizelle F, Bagshaw PF, et al.; ALCCaS Trial group. The ALCCaS trial: A randomized controlled trial comparing quality of life following laparoscopic versus open colectomy for colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018; 61:1156–1162.
Peters BS, Armijo PR, Krause C, Choudhury SA, Oleynikov D. Review of emerging surgical robotic technology. Surg Endosc. 2018; 32:1636–1655.
Stiegler P, Schemmer P. Robot-assisted transplant surgery: Vision or reality? A comprehensive review. Visc Med. 2018; 34:24–30.
Processing Request
No Comments.