From Cadaveric and Animal Studies to the Clinical Reality of Robotic Mastectomy: a Feasibility Report of Training Program

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2021 Oct 27

PMID 34702866

Citations 4

Authors

Jeea Lee

Hyung Seok Park

Dong Won Lee

Seung Yong Song

Jonghan Yu

Jai Min Ryu

Soong June Bae

Dea Hyun Lew

Seung Il Kim

Antonio Toesca

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) provides better cosmetic outcomes and improves the quality of life of women with breast cancer. However, this has not been widely adapted due to the lack of well-structured training programs. The present study aimed to report the establishment of cadaveric and animal skill laboratory training programs for RNSM and the participants' perception on the training programs. We performed 24 RNSMs using 11 cadavers and one porcine model. Then, the skill laboratory characteristics were reviewed. Five trainers and 10 trainees participated in the programs. The first four cadaveric RNSMs with latissimus dorsi flaps and implants were performed using the da Vinci Si® system. We performed 14 and six RNSMs using the Xi® and SP® systems, respectively. The scores for questionnaires on the satisfaction with the training consisted of the trainees' perceived goals in attending the course, teaching/learning environment, and teaching staff performance. The scores were excellent. Cadaveric or porcine RNSM skill laboratory training may be essential programs that can provide safe and efficient training.

Citing Articles

Development of a deep learning-based model for guiding a dissection during robotic breast surgery.

Lee J, Ham S, Kim N, Park H Breast Cancer Res. 2025; 27(1):34.

PMID: 40065440 PMC: 11895239. DOI: 10.1186/s13058-025-01981-3.

The emerging role of robotics in plastic and reconstructive surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Awad L, Reed B, Bollen E, Langridge B, Jasionowska S, Butler P J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):254.

PMID: 38878229 PMC: 11180031. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01987-7.

Robot-assisted Nipple Sparing Mastectomy: Recent Advancements and Ongoing Controversies.

Park K, Cha C, Pozzi G, Kang Y, Gregorc V, Sapino A Curr Breast Cancer Rep. 2023; 15(2):127-134.

PMID: 37293274 PMC: 10133895. DOI: 10.1007/s12609-023-00487-1.

Assessment of students' satisfaction with virtual robotic surgery training.

Kalinov T, Georgiev T, Bliznakova K, Zlatarov A, Kolev N Heliyon. 2023; 9(1):e12839.

PMID: 36699266 PMC: 9868440. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e12839.

Safe Technical Innovation: Development and Implementation of a Robotic Breast Operation Program.

Hewitt D, Park K Ann Surg Open. 2022; 3(3):e178.

PMID: 36199488 PMC: 9508976. DOI: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000178.

References

Ahmed K, Khan R, Mottrie A, Lovegrove C, Abaza R, Ahlawat R . Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts. BJU Int. 2014; 116(1):93-101. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12974. View

Lai H, Chen S, Mok C, Lin Y, Wu H, Lin S . Robotic versus conventional nipple sparing mastectomy and immediate gel implant breast reconstruction in the management of breast cancer- A case control comparison study with analysis of clinical outcome, medical cost, and patient-reported cosmetic.... J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2020; 73(8):1514-1525. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.02.021. View

Katz R, Hoznek A, Antiphon P, van Velthoven R, Delmas V, Abbou C . Cadaveric versus porcine models in urological laparoscopic training. Urol Int. 2003; 71(3):310-5. DOI: 10.1159/000072684. View

Sarfati B, Honart J, Leymarie N, Kolb F, Rimareix F . Robotic-assisted Nipple Sparing Mastectomy: A feasibility study on cadaveric models. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016; 69(11):1571-1572. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2016.08.007. View

Stefanidis D, Yonce T, Green J, Coker A . Cadavers versus pigs: which are better for procedural training of surgery residents outside the OR?. Surgery. 2013; 154(1):34-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2013.05.001. View

Toesca A, Invento A, Massari G, Girardi A, Peradze N, Lissidini G . Update on the Feasibility and Progress on Robotic Breast Surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019; 26(10):3046-3051. PMC: 7493284. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-019-07590-7. View

Torricelli F, Barbosa J, Marchini G . Impact of laparoscopic surgery training laboratory on surgeon's performance. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2016; 8(11):735-743. PMC: 5124702. DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v8.i11.735. View

Volpe A, Ahmed K, Dasgupta P, Ficarra V, Novara G, van der Poel H . Pilot Validation Study of the European Association of Urology Robotic Training Curriculum. Eur Urol. 2014; 68(2):292-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.025. View

Toesca A, Peradze N, Galimberti V, Manconi A, Intra M, Gentilini O . Robotic Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction With Implant: First Report of Surgical Technique. Ann Surg. 2017; 266(2):e28-e30. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001397. View

10.

da Costa P, Santos J, Maio R, Santos A, Paredes F . The role of a basic surgical skills laboratory as viewed by medical students (6th year). Med Teach. 2001; 23(2):176-180. DOI: 10.1080/01421590120036565. View

11.

Sarfati B, Honart J, Leymarie N, Rimareix F, Al Khashnam H, Kolb F . Robotic da Vinci Xi-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy: First clinical report. Breast J. 2017; 24(3):373-376. DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12937. View

12.

Lai H, Lin S, Chen S, Chen S, Lin Y, Chen D . Robotic Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Gel Implant. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2018; 6(6):e1828. PMC: 6157943. DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001828. View

13.

Goh A, Goldfarb D, Sander J, Miles B, Dunkin B . Global evaluative assessment of robotic skills: validation of a clinical assessment tool to measure robotic surgical skills. J Urol. 2011; 187(1):247-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.09.032. View

14.

Selber J, Baumann D, Holsinger F . Robotic latissimus dorsi muscle harvest: a case series. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012; 129(6):1305-1312. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824ecc0b. View

15.

Bertolo R, Garisto J, Dagenais J, Sagalovich D, Kaouk J . Single Session of Robotic Human Cadaver Training: The Immediate Impact on Urology Residents in a Teaching Hospital. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018; 28(10):1157-1162. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2018.0109. View

16.

Park H, Lee J, Lee H, Lee K, Song S, Toesca A . Development of Robotic Mastectomy Using a Single-Port Surgical Robot System. J Breast Cancer. 2020; 23(1):107-112. PMC: 7043949. DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2020.23.e3. View

17.

Ryu J, Kim J, Choi H, Ko B, Kim J, Cho J . Robot-assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Breast Reconstruction: An initial Experience of the Korea Robot-endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG). Ann Surg. 2020; 275(5):985-991. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004492. View

18.

Stefanidis D, Wang F, Korndorffer Jr J, Bruce Dunne J, Scott D . Robotic assistance improves intracorporeal suturing performance and safety in the operating room while decreasing operator workload. Surg Endosc. 2009; 24(2):377-82. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-009-0578-0. View

19.

Park H, Kim J, Lee D, Song S, Park S, Kim S . Gasless Robot-Assisted Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Case Report. J Breast Cancer. 2018; 21(3):334-338. PMC: 6158155. DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2018.21.e45. View