Influence of Otolaryngological Subspecialties on Perception of Transoral Robotic Surgery: An International YO-IFOS Survey

Overview

Journal J Pers Med

Date 2023 Dec 23

PMID 38138944

Authors

Antonino Maniaci

Carlos Chiesa Estomba

Nicolas Fakhry

Luigi Angelo Vaira

Marc Remacle

Giovanni Cammaroto

Maria Rosaria Barillari

Giannicola Iannella

Miguel Mayo-Yanez

Alberto Maria Saibene

Robin Baudouin

Juan Maza-Solano

Abie H Mendelsohn

Floyd Christopher Holsinger

Fabio P Ceccon

Leonardo Haddad

Stephane Hans

Ignazio La Mantia

Salvatore Cocuzza

Federica Gulinello

Tareck Ayad

Jerome R Lechien

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: To investigate perception, adoption, and awareness on the part of otolaryngology and head and neck surgeons (OTO-HNS) of transoral robotic surgery (TORS).

Methods: Several items assessed: awareness/perception; access to TORS; training; indications and advantages/hurdles to TORS practice. A subanalysis was performed to assess differences according to the identified otolaryngological subspecialties.

Results: A total of 359 people completed the survey. Among subspecialties, while for otolaryngologists 30/359 (8.4%) and H&N surgeons 100/359 (27.9%) TORS plays an effective role in hospital stay, laryngologists frequently disagreed (54.3%). There was a lower incidence among rhinologists and otologists (1.9%). Pediatric surgeons (0.8%) reported a positive response regarding the adoption of robotic surgery, and head and neck specialists expressed an even greater response (14.2%). Low adherence was related to perceived cost-prohibitive TORS, by 50% of H&N surgeons.

Conclusions: Perception, adoption, and knowledge about TORS play a key role in the application of the robotic system, significantly varying across subspecialties.

References

Mandapathil M, Meyer J . Acceptance and adoption of transoral robotic surgery in Germany. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021; 278(10):4021-4026. PMC: 8382611. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-06623-w. View

Liberman D, Trinh Q, Jeldres C, Zorn K . Is robotic surgery cost-effective: yes. Curr Opin Urol. 2011; 22(1):61-5. DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32834d543f. View

Dhanani N, Olavarria O, Millas S, Askenasy E, Ko T, Liang M . Is robotic surgery feasible at a safety net hospital?. Surg Endosc. 2020; 35(8):4452-4458. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-07948-z. View

McLeod I, Mair E, Melder P . Potential applications of the da Vinci minimally invasive surgical robotic system in otolaryngology. Ear Nose Throat J. 2005; 84(8):483-7. View

Krishnan S, Connell J, Ofo E . Transoral robotic surgery base of tongue mucosectomy for head and neck cancer of unknown primary. ANZ J Surg. 2016; 87(12):E281-E284. DOI: 10.1111/ans.13741. View

Iseli T, Kulbersh B, Iseli C, Carroll W, Rosenthal E, Magnuson J . Functional outcomes after transoral robotic surgery for head and neck cancer. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009; 141(2):166-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.otohns.2009.05.014. View

OMalley Jr B, Weinstein G . Robotic skull base surgery: preclinical investigations to human clinical application. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007; 133(12):1215-9. DOI: 10.1001/archotol.133.12.1215. View

Sobel R, Blanco R, Ha P, Califano J, Kumar R, Richmon J . Implementation of a comprehensive competency-based transoral robotic surgery training curriculum with ex vivo dissection models. Head Neck. 2016; 38(10):1553-63. DOI: 10.1002/hed.24475. View

Ghazanfar S, Qureshi S, Zubair M, Fateh U, Ahmed S, Quraishy M . Feasibility of robotic surgery in a developing country, a public sector Perspective. J Pak Med Assoc. 2019; 69(1):44-48. View

10.

Castaldi M, Palmer M, Con J, Abouezzi Z, Latifi R, Bergamaschi R . Robotic-Assisted Surgery Training (RAST) Program: An Educational Research Protocol. Surg Technol Int. 2021; 38:52-55. View

11.

Chen R, Armijo P, Krause C, Siu K, Oleynikov D . A comprehensive review of robotic surgery curriculum and training for residents, fellows, and postgraduate surgical education. Surg Endosc. 2019; 34(1):361-367. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06775-1. View

12.

Bertolo R, Garisto J, Gettman M, Kaouk J . Novel System for Robotic Single-port Surgery: Feasibility and State of the Art in Urology. Eur Urol Focus. 2018; 4(5):669-673. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.06.004. View

13.

Chan J, Tsang R, Eisele D, Richmon J . Transoral robotic surgery of the parapharyngeal space: a case series and systematic review. Head Neck. 2013; 37(2):293-8. DOI: 10.1002/hed.23557. View

14.

Bhayani M, Holsinger F, Lai S . A shifting paradigm for patients with head and neck cancer: transoral robotic surgery (TORS). Oncology (Williston Park). 2010; 24(11):1010-5. View

15.

Tae K, Song C, Ji Y, Sung E, Jeong J, Kim D . Oncologic outcomes of robotic thyroidectomy: 5-year experience with propensity score matching. Surg Endosc. 2016; 30(11):4785-4792. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-4808-y. View

16.

Othman S, McKinnon B . Financial outcomes of transoral robotic surgery: A narrative review. Am J Otolaryngol. 2018; 39(4):448-452. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2018.04.001. View

17.

Byeon H, Holsinger F, Kim D, Kim J, Park J, Koh Y . Feasibility of robot-assisted neck dissection followed by transoral robotic surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014; 53(1):68-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2014.09.024. View

18.

Weinstein G, OMalley Jr B, Cohen M, Quon H . Transoral robotic surgery for advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010; 136(11):1079-85. DOI: 10.1001/archoto.2010.191. View

19.

Gross N, Holsinger F, Magnuson J, Duvvuri U, Genden E, Ghanem T . Robotics in otolaryngology and head and neck surgery: Recommendations for training and credentialing: A report of the 2015 AHNS education committee, AAO-HNS robotic task force and AAO-HNS sleep disorders committee. Head Neck. 2016; 38 Suppl 1:E151-8. PMC: 4927077. DOI: 10.1002/hed.24207. View

20.

Meccariello G, Maniaci A, Bianchi G, Cammaroto G, Iannella G, Catalano A . Neck dissection and trans oral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2021; 49(1):117-125. DOI: 10.1016/j.anl.2021.05.007. View