Cargando…

Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience

Introduction  Robotic neck dissection surgery allows less invasiveness to significantly improve the aesthetic impact even though it does not compromise the principles of radical cancer procedure. Objective  The aim of our work is to describe our personal experience with robotic neck dissection surge...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Poma, Salvatore, Modica, Domenico Michele, Pitruzzella, Alessandro, Fucarino, Alberto, Mattina, Gianfranco, Fasola, Salvatore, Pirrello, Daniele, Galfano, Giuseppe Mario
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda. 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8789484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35096176
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1718957
_version_ 1784639775932678144
author Poma, Salvatore
Modica, Domenico Michele
Pitruzzella, Alessandro
Fucarino, Alberto
Mattina, Gianfranco
Fasola, Salvatore
Pirrello, Daniele
Galfano, Giuseppe Mario
author_facet Poma, Salvatore
Modica, Domenico Michele
Pitruzzella, Alessandro
Fucarino, Alberto
Mattina, Gianfranco
Fasola, Salvatore
Pirrello, Daniele
Galfano, Giuseppe Mario
author_sort Poma, Salvatore
collection PubMed
description Introduction  Robotic neck dissection surgery allows less invasiveness to significantly improve the aesthetic impact even though it does not compromise the principles of radical cancer procedure. Objective  The aim of our work is to describe our personal experience with robotic neck dissection surgery. Methods  A retrospective study was conducted by analyzing 10 patients subjected to a robotic neck dissection surgery. In the period from August 2012 to December 2018, these patients have been treated exclusively with robotic lateral-cervical dissection. Five of them were subjected to robotic-assisted transaxillary neck dissection (RATAND) and the other 5 treated with robotic-assisted retroauricular neck dissection (RARAND), then the surgical results have been compared with 5 similar dissections performed by open neck dissection (OND). Results  The average surgical time of RATAND was estimated in 166 minutes, the average surgical time of RARAND was estimated in 153 minutes and the average surgical time of OND was estimated in 48 minutes. Both robotic techniques are valid from the oncological and aesthetic point of view, but in terms of surgical time, they are much longer than the open technique. Conclusions  In terms of the post-operative decree, in our opinion, the retroauricular technique is more rapid for the purposes of recovery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8789484
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87894842022-01-27 Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience Poma, Salvatore Modica, Domenico Michele Pitruzzella, Alessandro Fucarino, Alberto Mattina, Gianfranco Fasola, Salvatore Pirrello, Daniele Galfano, Giuseppe Mario Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol Introduction  Robotic neck dissection surgery allows less invasiveness to significantly improve the aesthetic impact even though it does not compromise the principles of radical cancer procedure. Objective  The aim of our work is to describe our personal experience with robotic neck dissection surgery. Methods  A retrospective study was conducted by analyzing 10 patients subjected to a robotic neck dissection surgery. In the period from August 2012 to December 2018, these patients have been treated exclusively with robotic lateral-cervical dissection. Five of them were subjected to robotic-assisted transaxillary neck dissection (RATAND) and the other 5 treated with robotic-assisted retroauricular neck dissection (RARAND), then the surgical results have been compared with 5 similar dissections performed by open neck dissection (OND). Results  The average surgical time of RATAND was estimated in 166 minutes, the average surgical time of RARAND was estimated in 153 minutes and the average surgical time of OND was estimated in 48 minutes. Both robotic techniques are valid from the oncological and aesthetic point of view, but in terms of surgical time, they are much longer than the open technique. Conclusions  In terms of the post-operative decree, in our opinion, the retroauricular technique is more rapid for the purposes of recovery. Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda. 2021-03-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8789484/ /pubmed/35096176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1718957 Text en Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Poma, Salvatore
Modica, Domenico Michele
Pitruzzella, Alessandro
Fucarino, Alberto
Mattina, Gianfranco
Fasola, Salvatore
Pirrello, Daniele
Galfano, Giuseppe Mario
Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience
title Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience
title_full Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience
title_fullStr Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience
title_full_unstemmed Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience
title_short Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience
title_sort robotic-assisted neck dissection: our experience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8789484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35096176
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1718957
work_keys_str_mv AT pomasalvatore roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience
AT modicadomenicomichele roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience
AT pitruzzellaalessandro roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience
AT fucarinoalberto roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience
AT mattinagianfranco roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience
AT fasolasalvatore roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience
AT pirrellodaniele roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience
AT galfanogiuseppemario roboticassistedneckdissectionourexperience