Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Library and Information Services, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Br J Surg. 2020 Nov;107(12):1580-1594. doi: 10.1002/bjs.11837. Epub 2020 Aug 26.
The growing volume of studies of robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy requires critical assessment. This review synthesizes the data on safety, feasibility, oncological and cosmetic outcomes, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy.
A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process/ePubs, Embase/Embase Classic, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, LILACS, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.Gov, WHO ICTRP and the grey literature. Original studies reporting on patients with breast cancer or at increased risk of breast cancer undergoing robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Institute of Health Economics Case Series Quality Appraisal Checklist.
Of 7177 titles screened, eight articles were included, reporting on 249 robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomies in 187 women. The indication was either therapeutic (58·6 per cent) or prophylactic (41·4 per cent), with immediate reconstruction performed in 96·8 per cent. Surgical techniques followed a similar approach, with variations in incision, robot models, camera and insufflation. Postoperative morbidity included skin complications, lymphocele, infection, seroma, haematoma and skin ischaemia/necrosis. Complications specific to the nipple-areolar complex included ischaemia and necrosis. There were two conversions owing to haemorrhage, but no intraoperative deaths. Three patients had positive margins. Follow-up time ranged from 3·4 to 44·8 months. Locoregional recurrences were not observed. PROMs and objective cosmetic outcomes were reported inconsistently. Data on nipple sensitivity were not reported.
Robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy is feasible with acceptable short-term outcomes but it remains in the assessment phase.
机器人辅助保乳乳房切除术的研究数量不断增加,需要对其进行严格评估。本综述综合了有关机器人辅助保乳乳房切除术的安全性、可行性、肿瘤学和美容学结果以及患者报告的结局测量(PROMs)的数据。
使用 MEDLINE、MEDLINE In-Process/ePubs、Embase/Embase Classic、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、Cochrane 系统评价数据库、LILACS、PubMed、ClinicalTrials.gov、世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台和灰色文献进行了系统评价。纳入了报告接受机器人辅助保乳乳房切除术的乳腺癌或乳腺癌风险增加的患者的原始研究。使用卫生经济学研究所病例系列质量评估清单评估偏倚风险。
在筛选出的 7177 篇标题中,有 8 篇文章纳入了 187 名女性的 249 例机器人辅助保乳乳房切除术。适应证为治疗性(58.6%)或预防性(41.4%),96.8%的患者立即进行了重建。手术技术类似,切口、机器人型号、摄像头和充气方式存在差异。术后并发症包括皮肤并发症、淋巴囊肿、感染、血清肿、血肿和皮肤缺血/坏死。乳头乳晕复合体特有的并发症包括缺血和坏死。由于出血有 2 例转为开放手术,但无术中死亡。3 例患者切缘阳性。随访时间从 3.4 到 44.8 个月不等。未观察到局部区域复发。PROMs 和客观美容结果的报告不一致。乳头敏感性的数据未报告。
机器人辅助保乳乳房切除术是可行的,具有可接受的短期结果,但仍处于评估阶段。