Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
Use of Robotic Surgery in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: A Narrative Review.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Novo Jennifer, Seth Ishith, Mon Yi, Soni Akshay, Elkington Olivia, Marcaccini Gianluca, Rozen Warren M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Robotic systems offer enhanced precision, dexterity, and visualization, which are essential in addressing the complex nature of plastic surgery procedures. Despite widespread adoption in other surgical specialties, such as urology and gynecology, their application in plastic surgery remains underexplored. This review examines the use of robotic systems in plastic and reconstructive surgery with a focus on clinical outcomes.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Search terms included ("robotic surgery" OR "surgical robots") AND ("plastic surgery" OR "reconstructive surgery"). Studies on clinical outcomes and biomimetic innovations published between 1980 and 2024 were included, while non-English, cadaver-based, and animal studies were excluded. Data were systematically extracted using Covidence and analyzed.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were identified that evaluated the clinical outcomes of robotics in areas including breast reconstruction, microsurgery, and craniofacial procedures. Robotic systems like the Da Vinci and Symani platforms offer motion scaling, tremor elimination, and enhanced depth perception. In nipple-sparing mastectomies, they reduced skin necrosis rates from 8% to 2%, while in DIEP flap reconstruction, they enabled smaller fascial incisions (2.67 ± 1.13 cm vs. 8.14 ± 1.69 cm) and faster recovery with fewer complications. In microsurgery, they achieved 100% patency for vessels under 0.3 mm and a 25.2% limb volume reduction in lymphedema patients in 3 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic systems show significant promise, particularly in procedures such as nipple-sparing mastectomies, and have the potential to overcome challenges including surgeon fatigue. However, challenges such as longer operating times, high costs, and limited haptic feedback remain barriers to their adoption.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Search terms included ("robotic surgery" OR "surgical robots") AND ("plastic surgery" OR "reconstructive surgery"). Studies on clinical outcomes and biomimetic innovations published between 1980 and 2024 were included, while non-English, cadaver-based, and animal studies were excluded. Data were systematically extracted using Covidence and analyzed.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were identified that evaluated the clinical outcomes of robotics in areas including breast reconstruction, microsurgery, and craniofacial procedures. Robotic systems like the Da Vinci and Symani platforms offer motion scaling, tremor elimination, and enhanced depth perception. In nipple-sparing mastectomies, they reduced skin necrosis rates from 8% to 2%, while in DIEP flap reconstruction, they enabled smaller fascial incisions (2.67 ± 1.13 cm vs. 8.14 ± 1.69 cm) and faster recovery with fewer complications. In microsurgery, they achieved 100% patency for vessels under 0.3 mm and a 25.2% limb volume reduction in lymphedema patients in 3 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic systems show significant promise, particularly in procedures such as nipple-sparing mastectomies, and have the potential to overcome challenges including surgeon fatigue. However, challenges such as longer operating times, high costs, and limited haptic feedback remain barriers to their adoption.