Implementation of robot-assisted lymphaticovenous anastomoses in a microsurgical unit

• Published in: European journal of plastic surgery Vol. 47; no. 1
• Main Authors: Reilly, Frank O. F., Nilsson, Anna, Frieberg, Helena, Mayr-Riedler, Michael S., Mani, Maria
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 26.01.2024
• Subjects: Anastomosis; Implementation; LVA; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Original Paper; Plastic Surgery; Robotic; Supermicrosurgery; Robotic; LVA; Implementation; Anastomosis; Supermicrosurgery
• ISSN: 1435-0130; 0930-343X; 1435-0130
• DOI: 10.1007/s00238-024-02163-8

Background Numerous papers have been published evaluating the clinical benefits of robot-assisted microsurgery. In this study, we describe the incorporation of the MUSA-2 robot (Microsure, Eindhoven, The Netherlands) into a plastic surgery unit outside of its development centre. We aimed to assess robot implementation timeframes, areas of future development, and key learning points for centres considering the establishment of a robot-assisted microsurgery service. Methods We identified 12 female patients with upper limb lymphoedema secondary to breast cancer treatment, who consented to have a robotic-assisted lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA) from September 2022 to March 2023. All patients had at least one robot-assisted LVA. Post operatively, a surgical evaluation of the robot’s performance and of the surgeon’s intraoperative workload was measured. Each patient completed a postoperative Likert scale, which measured their surgical experience. Results The mean robot time per case was 60.25 min. The mean time taken for the first robot-assisted anastomosis was 32 min. The second robot anastomoses was 30% faster than the first, taking a mean of 22.5 min. The average anastomosis had 4.5 sutures placed robotically. Initial mean scores in the workload survey completed by the surgeon were highest for frustration and effort, both reduced with increasing volume of cases. In 91% of cases, physical intraoperative discomfort was reported by the surgeon but completely resolved following repositioning. Conclusions The current technology can be readily incorporated into a microsurgical unit. We developed four key learning points from the implementation of robot-assisted LVA in our microsurgical unit. Level of evidence: Level IV, risk/prognostic study