BACKGROUND: The integration of robotic technology into surgical procedures has gained considerable attention for its promise to enhance a variety of clinical outcomes. Robotic deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap harvest has emerged as a novel approach for autologous breast reconstruction. This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current techniques, outcomes, and complications of robotic DIEP flap surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted after PRISMA 2020 guidelines across databases including PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Web of Science from 2000 to 2023. Articles exploring robotic DIEP flap harvest for breast reconstruction were assessed to compare operative techniques, clinical outcomes, and complications. The risk of bias was evaluated using ROBINS-I and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Fourteen studies involving 108 patients were included. Three studies used a totally extraperitoneal (TEP) technique, whereas 11 studies used a transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) approach. Preoperative planning utilized computed tomography angiography and magnetic resonance angiography imaging. The mean robotic operative time was 64 minutes, with total operative times averaging 574 minutes for TAPP and 497 minutes for TEP. The mean length of stay was 5 days, and the mean fascial incision length was 3 cm. Overall complication rate was 14.9%, with no significant difference compared with conventional DIEP flap procedures. CONCLUSION: Robotic DIEP flap harvest is a promising technique that may reduce postoperative pain and limiting abdominal donor site morbidity. Potential limitations include longer operative times, variable hospital stays, and increased costs.

Baylor College of Medicine Houston TX

Department of Anatomy Faculty of Medicine Akdeniz University Antalya Turkey

Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic

Department of Plastic Surgery Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH

Department of Plastic Surgery Royal Free Hospital London United Kingdom; UCL Division of Surgery and Surgical Sciences London UK

Department of Plastic Surgery Vanderbilt University Medical Center Nashville TN

Division of Plastic Surgery Department of Surgery University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA

Faculty of Medicine Dicle University Diyarbakir Turkey

The Institute for Reconstructive Surgery Houston Methodist Hospital Weill Cornell Medicine

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Bucher F, Vogt PM, Krezdorn N, et al. Free tissue transfer for reconstruction after bilateral skin sparing mastectomy—a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg 2024;92:469–473.

Haddock NT, Culver AJ, Teotia SS. Abdominal weakness, bulge, or hernia after DIEP flaps: An algorithm of management, prevention, and surgical repair with classification. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2021;74:2194–2201

Selber JC. Robotics in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Springer International Publishing; 2021.

Innocenti M. Back to the future: robotic microsurgery. Arch Plast Surg 2022;49:287–288.

Henn D, Trotsyuk AA, Barrera JA, et al. Robotics in plastic surgery: it’s here. Plast Reconstr Surg 2023;152:239–249

Nores GDPG, Kanchwala S. Minimally invasive approaches to DIEP flap harvest: a review of current data. Handchir · Mikrochir · Plast Chir 2023;55:120–125.

Tanna N, Sugiyama G, Smith ML, et al. The full continuum of robotic breast surgery: robotic-assisted mastectomy, robotic DIEP flap, and robotic supermicrosurgery. Plast Reconstr Surg–Glob Open 2023;11:e5491

Struk S, Sarfati B, Leymarie N, et al. Robotic-assisted DIEP flap harvest: a feasibility study on cadaveric model. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2018;71:259–261

Chen K, Zhang J, Beeraka NM, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive breast surgery: recent evidence with comparative clinical outcomes. J Clin Med 2022;11:1827

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71.

Ga W. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 3rd Symp Syst Rev Basics Oxf UK 3-5 July 2000. 2024. Accessed March 27. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1573950400960524672

Sterne JA, Hernán MA, McAleenan A, et al. Assessing risk of bias in a non-randomized study In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 1st ed. Wiley; 2019:621–641.

Schoonjans F. MedCalc statistical software - free trial available. MedCalc 2024. Accessed March 27. https://www.medcalc.org/

Gundlapalli VS, Ogunleye AA, Scott K, et al. Robotic-assisted deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap abdominal harvest for breast reconstruction: a case report. Microsurgery 2018;38:702–705.

Choi JH, Song SY, Park HS, et al. Robotic DIEP flap harvest through a totally extraperitoneal approach using a single-port surgical robotic system. Plast Reconstr Surg 2021;148:304–307

Jung JH, Jeon YR, Lee DW, et al. Initial report of extraperitoneal pedicle dissection in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction using the da Vinci SP. Arch Plast Surg 2022;49:34–38.

Lee MJ, Won J, Song SY, et al. Clinical outcomes following robotic versus conventional DIEP flap in breast reconstruction: a retrospective matched study. Front Oncol 2022;12:989231

Selber JC. The robotic DIEP flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020;145:340–343

Shakir S, Spencer AB, Piper M, et al. Laparoscopy allows the harvest of the DIEP flap with shorter fascial incisions as compared to endoscopic harvest: a single surgeon retrospective cohort study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2021;74:1203–1212

Bishop SN, Asaad M, Liu J, et al. Robotic harvest of the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for breast reconstruction: a case series. Plast Reconstr Surg 2022;149:1073–1077

Daar DA, Anzai LM, Vranis NM, et al. Robotic deep inferior epigastric perforator flap harvest in breast reconstruction. Microsurgery 2022;42:319–325.

Kurlander DE, Le-Petross HT, Shuck JW, et al. Robotic DIEP patient selection: analysis of CT angiography. Plast Reconstr Surg–Glob Open 2021;9:e3970

Piper M, Ligh CA, Shakir S, et al. Minimally invasive robotic-assisted harvest of the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for autologous breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg JPRAS 2021;74:890–930

Dayaratna N, Ahmadi N, Mak C, et al. Robotic-assisted deep inferior epigastric perforator ( DIEP ) flap harvest for breast reconstruction. ANZ J Surg 2023;93:1072–1074.

Tsai CY, Kim BS, Kuo WL, et al. Novel port placement in robot-assisted DIEP flap harvest improves visibility and bilateral DIEP access: early controlled cohort study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2023;152:590e–595e.

Nelson W, Murariu D, Moreira AA. Indocyanine green guided near-infrared fluorescence (ICG-NIRF) enhances vascular anatomy in robotic assisted DIEP flap harvest. Plast Reconstr Surg 2023.10–1097; Published online.

Wittesaele W, Vandevoort M. Implementing the Robotic deep inferior epigastric perforator Flap in daily practice: a series of 10 cases. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2022;75:2577–2583

Manrique OJ, Bustos SS, Mohan AT, et al. Robotic-Assisted DIEP Flap Harvest for Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Feasibility Study on a Cadaveric Model. J Reconstr Microsurg 2020;36:362–368.

Donnely E, Griffin MF, Butler PE. Robotic surgery: a novel approach for breast surgery and reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg–Glob Open 2020;8:e2578

van Mulken TJ, Schols RM, Scharmga AM, et al. First-in-human robotic supermicrosurgery using a dedicated microsurgical robot for treating breast cancer-related lymphedema: a randomized pilot trial. Nat Commun 2020;11:757

sitecore\kshehan@rcseng.ac.uk. Robotic-assisted surgery: a pathway to the future. Royal College of Surgeons. Accessed March 27, 2024. https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/standards-and-research/standards-and-guidance/good-practice-guides/robotic-assisted-surgery/

Susanto BA, Aurelie N, Nathaniel W, et al. Conventional and robot-assisted microvascular anastomosis: systematic review. J Reconstr Microsurg Open 2024;09:e27–e33.

Khoong YM, Huang X, Gu S, et al. Imaging for thinned perforator flap harvest: current status and future perspectives. Burns Trauma 2021;9:tkab042

Bajus A, Streit L, Kubek T, et al. Color Doppler ultrasound versus CT angiography for DIEP flap planning: a randomized controlled trial. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2023;86:48–57

O’Connor EF, Rozen WM, Chowdhry M, et al. Preoperative computed tomography angiography for planning DIEP flap breast reconstruction reduces operative time and overall complications. Gland Surg 2016;5:93

Wade RG, Watford J, Wormald JC, et al. Perforator mapping reduces the operative time of DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance angiography. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2018;71:468–477

Shtarbanov P, Ioannidi L, Hamilton S, et al. Prolonged operative time is a risk factor for adverse postoperative outcomes in the unilateral deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap surgery: a retrospective cohort study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2023;87:180–186

Heidekrueger PI, Moellhoff N, Horch RE, et al. Overall complication rates of DIEP flap breast reconstructions in Germany—a multi-center analysis based on the DGPRÄC prospective national online registry for microsurgical breast reconstructions. J Clin Med 2021;10:1016

Jacobs JED, Beudeker N, Bargon CA, et al. Lean DIEP flap surgery: saving time and reducing complications. Eur J Plast Surg 2021;44:793–800.

Tan YP, Liverneaux P, Wong JK. Current limitations of surgical robotics in reconstructive plastic microsurgery. Front Surg 2018;5:22

Lai HW, Chen DR, Liu LC, et al. Robotic versus conventional or endoscopic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate prosthesis breast reconstruction in the management of breast cancer: a prospectively designed multicenter trial comparing clinical outcomes, medical cost, and patient-reported outcomes (RCENSM-P). Ann Surg 2024;279:138.

Kim J, Lee KT, Mun GH. Short fasciotomy-deep inferior epigastric perforator flap harvest for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2023;152:972e–984e.

Hilven PH, Vandevoort M, Bruyninckx F, et al. Limiting the fascia incision length in a DIEP flap: repercussion on abdominal wall morbidity. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2022;75:1108–1116

Colohan S, Maia M, Langevin CJ, et al. The short-and ultrashort-pedicle deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012;129:331–340

Araya S, Hackley M, Amadio GM, et al. Survey of surgeon-reported postoperative protocols for deep inferior epigastric perforator flap in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2023;11:e5402.

Tapp MW, Duet ML, Steele TN, et al. Postoperative day 1 discharge in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg–Glob Open 2023;11:e5064

Palve JS, Luukkaala TH, Kääriäinen MT. Necrosis or flap loss after deep inferior epigastric perforator reconstruction: impact of perforators and recipient vessels. J Reconstr Microsurg Open 2021;06:e20–e27.

Varnava C, Wiebringhaus P, Hirsch T, et al. Breast reconstruction with DIEP flap: the learning curve at a breast reconstruction center and a single-surgeon study. J Clin Med 2023;12:2894.

Taghizadeh R. Invited discussion on: fat necrosis after DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a review of perfusion-related causes. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2020;44:1462–1465.