Valencia-García LC, Canepa-Fernández P, Matabuena-Tamez R, Oviedo-García RE

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 43-49
PDF size: 366.83 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Reconstructive surgery has always been a surgical challenge. The attributes of robotic surgery make it a very attractive option for microsurgery, a discipline that demands optimal visualization, decreased tremor, technical skill, and precise surgical manipulation. It is important to update the plastic surgery community regarding the expansion of robotics in our specialty, demonstrating how the characteristics of the robot can contribute to improve safety and surgical results. We did a bibliographic review in the PubMed and Medline databases, using the following search terms individually or in combination: robot, robotics in plastic surgery, robotic microsurgery. We selected 16 articles and the main results are presented in this work. We also discuss the controversies that exist, costs and the learning curve. The increase in minimally invasive procedures has made these procedures rise. In plastic surgery there are few applications so far, but; undoubtedly, in the future, there will be an increase. Cost is the main disadvantage; but, if the robot is used by different specialties in a hospital, the device could have a positive cost/benefit ratio in the long run. Robotic surgery is the next step in the evolution of minimally invasive surgery, providing superhuman levels of precision and high definition 3D visualization that can expand the ability of plastic surgeons to achieve complex procedures in a safer and more effective way.

REFERENCES

1. Ibrahim A, Sarhane K, Selber J. Robotics in plastic surgery. Curr Surg Rep 2016; 4 (9): 1-9.

2. Katz R, Taylor J, Rosson G, Brown P, Singh N. Robotics in plastic and reconstructive surgery: use of a telemanipulator slave robot to perform microvascular anastomoses. J Reconstr Microsurg 2006; 22 (1): 53-58.

3. Saleh DB, Syed M, Kulendren D, Ramakrishnan V, Liverneaux P. Plastic and reconstructive robotic microsurgery - a review of current practices. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2015; 60 (4): 305-312.

4. Selber J. Robotics in plastic surgery. Semin Plast Surg 2014; 28: 3-4.

5. Ibrahim A, Sarhane K, Baroud J, Atiyeh B. Robotics in plastic surgery, a review. Eur J Plast Surg 2012; 35: 571-578.

6. Li RA, Jensen J, Bowersox JC. Microvascular anastomoses performed in rats using a microsurgical telemanipulator. Comput Aided Surg 2000; 5 (5): 326-332.

7. Nehme J, Neville J, Nehme A. The use of robotics in plastic and reconstructive surgery: a systematic review. JPRS Open 2017; 13: 1-10.

8. Hassanein A, Mailey B, Dobke M. Robot assisted plastic surgery. Clin Plast Surg 2012; 39: 419-424.

9. Ibrahim A, Sarhane K, Selber J. New frontiers in robotic-assisted microsurgical reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 2017; 44 (2): 415-423.

10. Song HG, Yun IS, Lee WJ, Lew DH, Rah DK. Robot-assisted free flap in head and neck reconstruction. Arch Plast Surg 2013; 40: 353-358.

11. Saraf f. Role of robot assisted microsurgery in plastic surgery. Indian J Plast 2006; 39 (1): 57-61.

12. Selber J, Baumann D, Holsinger C. Robotic latissimus dorsi muscle harvest: a case series. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 129 (6): 1305-1312.

13. Ponnusamy K, Mohr C, Curet MJ. Clinical outcomes with robotic surgery. Curr Probl Surg 2011; 48 (9): 577-656.

14. Biron VL, O'Connell DA, Barber B et al. Transoral robotic surgery with radial forearm free flap reconstruction: case control analysis. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017; 46 (1): 20.

15. Selber JC. Robotic latissimus dorsi muscle harvest. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 128 (2): 88-90.

16. Selber J. Can I make robotic surgery make sense in my practice? Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 139 (3): 781-792.