We use cookies to offer you an optimal experience on our website. By browsing our website, you accept the use of cookies.

Daniel SALEH

Yorkshire Deanery
Leeds, United Kingdom
MD
16 likes
360 views
0 comments
Filter by
Technologies
View more
Lastest Publication
View more
Sort by:
Plastic and reconstructive robotic surgery: 5 cases and a systematic review
Introduction
We sought to determine the feasibility of robotic microvascular surgery in reconstructive surgery. Additionally, we performed a systematic review to assess the current developments in robotic plastic surgery.

Methods
Between February 2009 and June 2010, five patients underwent robotic microvascular anastomoses for delayed, free-tissue breast reconstruction, using the deep inferior epigastric artery (DIEP) flap. A PubMed and MEDLINE search was also performed using specific search terms.

Results
Mean patient age was 55.4 years. Mean robotic anastomotic time was 96 minutes. There were no additional errors of management (EOM). Figure 1 shows anastomotic times. No intraoperative or postoperative flap-related complications were encountered.
The literature search yielded 338 articles. Only 19 publications were relevant and further analyzed. The majority of authors report outcomes of microvascular surgery in laboratory conditions. Robotic microsurgery is accurate but consistently takes longer than with the microscope. Investigators consistently report poor haptic feedback.

Conclusion
Robotic microsurgery is safe in our experience. The current literature illustrates comparable vascular patency rates at the cost of longer operative times. Comparing robotic and standard microsurgery may be hampering the evolution of robotic plastic surgery because of this focus. The ability to perform microsurgery in confined anatomical spaces will reduce patient morbidity and potentially reduce in-patient stay. The ability to raise and inset flaps and explore neural and vascular structures, whilst avoiding large access wounds at both donor and recipient sites, is very attractive. Consequently, we believe that there any many reconstructive applications, and collaboration to produce meaningful clinical outcomes is required.
Lecture
5 years ago
360 views
16 likes
0 comments
10:28
Plastic and reconstructive robotic surgery: 5 cases and a systematic review
Introduction
We sought to determine the feasibility of robotic microvascular surgery in reconstructive surgery. Additionally, we performed a systematic review to assess the current developments in robotic plastic surgery.

Methods
Between February 2009 and June 2010, five patients underwent robotic microvascular anastomoses for delayed, free-tissue breast reconstruction, using the deep inferior epigastric artery (DIEP) flap. A PubMed and MEDLINE search was also performed using specific search terms.

Results
Mean patient age was 55.4 years. Mean robotic anastomotic time was 96 minutes. There were no additional errors of management (EOM). Figure 1 shows anastomotic times. No intraoperative or postoperative flap-related complications were encountered.
The literature search yielded 338 articles. Only 19 publications were relevant and further analyzed. The majority of authors report outcomes of microvascular surgery in laboratory conditions. Robotic microsurgery is accurate but consistently takes longer than with the microscope. Investigators consistently report poor haptic feedback.

Conclusion
Robotic microsurgery is safe in our experience. The current literature illustrates comparable vascular patency rates at the cost of longer operative times. Comparing robotic and standard microsurgery may be hampering the evolution of robotic plastic surgery because of this focus. The ability to perform microsurgery in confined anatomical spaces will reduce patient morbidity and potentially reduce in-patient stay. The ability to raise and inset flaps and explore neural and vascular structures, whilst avoiding large access wounds at both donor and recipient sites, is very attractive. Consequently, we believe that there any many reconstructive applications, and collaboration to produce meaningful clinical outcomes is required.