Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2022; 26(01): e178-e182
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1718957
Update Article

Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience

Salvatore Poma  ‡   *
1   U.O.C. Otolaryngology, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, Palermo, Italy
,
Domenico Michele Modica  ‡   *
1   U.O.C. Otolaryngology, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, Palermo, Italy
2   U.O.C. Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy and Histology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
,
Alessandro Pitruzzella 
2   U.O.C. Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy and Histology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
,
Alberto Fucarino 
2   U.O.C. Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy and Histology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
,
Gianfranco Mattina 
1   U.O.C. Otolaryngology, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, Palermo, Italy
2   U.O.C. Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy and Histology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
,
Salvatore Fasola 
3   Institute of Biomedicine and Molecular Immunology, “A. Monroy” (IBIM), CNR, Palermo, Italy
,
Daniele Pirrello 
4   University of Palermo, Bionec, Palermo, Italy
,
Giuseppe Mario Galfano 
1   U.O.C. Otolaryngology, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, Palermo, Italy
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

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.

Keywords

robotic - dissection - surgery - neck

* These authors contributed equally to this work.




Publication History

Received: 03 October 2019

Accepted: 23 August 2020

Article published online:
29 March 2021

© 2021. 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/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Kang SW, Lee SH, Ryu HR. et al. Initial experience with robot-assisted modified radical neck dissection for the management of thyroid carcinoma with lateral neck node metastasis. Surgery 2010; 148 (06) 1214-1221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kang SW, Lee SH, Park JH. et al. A comparative study of the surgical outcomes of robotic and conventional open modified radical neck dissection for papillary thyroid carcinoma with lateral neck node metastasis. Surg Endosc 2012; 26 (11) 3251-3257
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Weinstein GS, O'Malley Jr BW, Hockstein NG. Transoral robotic surgery: supraglottic laryngectomy in a canine model. Laryngoscope 2005; 115 (07) 1315-1319
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Weinstein GS, O'Malley Jr BW, Snyder W, Hockstein NG. Transoral robotic surgery: supraglottic partial laryngectomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2007; 116 (01) 19-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ciabatti PG, Burali G, D'Ascanio L. Transoral robotic surgery for large mixed laryngocoele. J Laryngol Otol 2013; 127 (04) 435-437
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Blanco RG, Ha PK, Califano JA, Saunders JM. Transoral robotic surgery of the vocal cord. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2011; 21 (02) 157-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Park YM, Lee WJ, Lee JG. et al. Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) in laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2009; 19 (03) 361-368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kayhan FT, Kaya KH, Sayin I. Transoral robotic cordectomy for early glottic carcinoma. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2012; 121 (08) 497-502
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lawson G, Mendelsohn AH, Van Der Vorst S, Bachy V, Remacle M. Transoral robotic surgery total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope 2013; 123 (01) 193-196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Dowthwaite S, Nichols AC, Yoo J. et al. Transoral robotic total laryngectomy: report of 3 cases. Head Neck 2013; 35 (11) E338-E342
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Krishnan G, Krishnan S. Transoral robotic surgery total laryngectomy: evaluation of functional and survival outcomes in a retrospective case series at a single institution. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2017; 79 (04) 191-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lee HS, Kim WS, Hong HJ. et al. Robot-assisted Supraomohyoid neck dissection via a modified face-lift or retroauricular approach in early-stage cN0 squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity: a comparative study with conventional technique. Ann Surg Oncol 2012; 19 (12) 3871-3878 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2423-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tae K, Ji YB, Song CM, Jeong JH, Cho SH, Lee SH. Robotic selective neck dissection by a postauricular facelift approach: comparison with conventional neck dissection. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014; 150 (03) 394-400 DOI: 10.1177/0194599813515431.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Greer Albergotti W, Kenneth Byrd J, De Almeida JR, Kim S, Duvvuri U. Robot-assisted level II-IV neck dissection through a modified facelift incision: initial North American experience. Int J Med Robot 2014; 10 (04) 391-396 DOI: 10.1002/rcs.1585.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Byeon HK, Holsinger FC, Tufano RP. et al. Robotic total thyroidectomy with modified radical neck dissection via unilateral retroauricular approach. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21 (12) 3872-3875 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3896-y.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Lira RB, Chulam TC, de Carvalho GB. et al. Retroauricular endoscopic and robotic versus conventional neck dissection for oral cancer. J Robot Surg 2018; 12 (01) 117-129 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-017-0706-0.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar