Surgical outcomes of robotic versus conventional autologous breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

AbstractBreast reconstruction is an integral part of breast cancer management. Conventional techniques of flap harvesting for autologous breast reconstruction are associated with considerable complications. Robotic surgery has enabled a new spectrum of minimally invasive breast surgeries. The current systematic review and meta-analysis study was designed to retrieve the surgical and clinical outcomes of robotic versus conventional techniques for autologous breast reconstruction. An extensive systematic literature review was performed from inception to 25 April 2023. All clinical studies comparing the outcomes of robotic and conventional autologous breast reconstruction were included for meta-analysis. The present meta-analysis included seven articles consisting of 783 patients. Of them, 263 patients received robotic breast reconstruction, while 520 patients received conventional technique. Of note, 477 patients received latissimus dorsi flap (LDF) and 306 were subjected to deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap. There was a significantly prolonged duration of surgery (MD 58.36;95% CI 32.05,84.67;P < 0.001) and duration of anaesthesia (MD 47;95% CI 16.23,77.77;P = 0.003) among patients who underwent robotic surgery. There was a similar risk of complications between robotic and conventional surgeries. The mean level of pain intensity was significantly lower among patients who received robotic breast surgery (MD− 0.28;95% CI − 0.73,0.17; P = 0.22). There was prolonged length of hospitalization among patients with conventional DIEP flap surgery (MD− 0.59;95% CI − 1.13,− 0.05;P = 0.03). The present meta-analysis highlighted the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of robotic autologous breast reconstruction. This included the successful harvesting of LDF and DIEP flap with acceptable surgical and functional outcomes.