Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Robotic-assisted microvascular surgery: skill acquisition in a rat model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Microsurgery is a technically demanding field with long learning curves. Robotic-assisted microsurgery has the ability to decrease these learning curves. We, therefore, sought to assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted microvascular surgery in a rat model, and whether this could be translated into a worthwhile skills acquisition exercise for residents. Twenty-eight rats underwent microvascular anastomosis. Procedures were performed by a trained microvascular surgeon with no robotic experience (n = 14), or a trained robotic surgeon with no microvascular experience (n = 14). Anesthetized rats were subjected to complete transection and end-to-end anastomosis of the abdominal aorta using 10–0 prolene. Manually (n = 6) and robotic-assisted (n = 8) procedures were performed by both surgeons. A successful procedure required a patent anastomosis and no bleeding. After approximately 35 days, angiography and histopathological studies of the anastomoses were performed. Median times for robotic-assisted anastomoses were 37.5 (34.2–42.7) min for the microsurgeon and 38.5 (32.7–52) min for robotic surgeon. In the manual group, it took 17 (13.5–23) min for microsurgeon and 44 (34.5–60) min for robotic surgeon. Within the robotic-assisted group, there was a trend toward improvement in both surgeons, but greater in the microsurgeon. Robotic-assisted microvascular anastomosis in a rat model is a feasible skill acquisition exercise. By eliminating the need for a skilled microsurgical assistant, as well as, improved microsurgical technology, the robotic system may prove to be a crucial player in future microsurgical skill training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rozen JM et al (2012) Robotics, simulation, and telemedicine in plastic surgery. In: Neligan, C (ed) Plastic surgery: principles. Saunders Elsevier Health, Amsterdam, Netherlands, ISBN: 978-1-4557-1052-2

  2. Delmo Walter EM et al (2008) Biventricular repair in children with complete atrioventricular septal defect and a small left ventricle. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 33(1):40–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Selber JC (2011) Robotic latissimus dorsi muscle harvest. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(2):88e–90e

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Patel NV, Pedersen JC (2012) Robotic harvest of the rectus abdominis muscle: a preclinical investigation and case report. J Reconstr Microsurg 28(7):477–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brahmbhatt JV et al (2014) Robotic microsurgery optimization. Arch Plast Surg 41(3):225–230

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Selber JC et al (2012) Tracking the learning curve in microsurgical skill acquisition. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(4):550e–557e

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Alrasheed T et al (2014) Robotic microsurgery: validating an assessment tool and plotting the learning curve. Plast Reconstr Surg 134(4):794–803

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schiff J, Li PS, Goldstein M (2004) Robotic microsurgical vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy: a prospective randomized study in a rat model. J Urol 171(4):1720–1725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Le Roux PD et al (2001) Robot-assisted microsurgery: a feasibility study in the rat. Neurosurgery 48(3):584–589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Temple CL, Ross DC (2011) A new, validated instrument to evaluate competency in microsurgery: the University of Western Ontario Microsurgical Skills Acquisition/Assessment instrument [outcomes article]. Plast Reconstr Surg 127(1):215–222

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kasten SJ, Chung KC (2014) Discussion: robotic microsurgery: validating an assessment tool and plotting the learning curve. Plast Reconstr Surg 134(4):804–807

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mehta A, Li PS (2013) Male infertility microsurgical training. Asian J Androl 15(1):61–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Siemionow M et al (2000) Robotic assistance in microsurgery. J Reconstr Microsurg 16(8):643–649

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. De Ugarte DA et al (2003) Robotic surgery and resident training. Surg Endosc 17(6):960–963

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Karamanoukian RL et al (2006) Transfer of training in robotic-assisted microvascular surgery. Ann Plast Surg 57(6):662–665

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Feins RH et al (2017) Simulation-based training in cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 103(1):312–321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mokadam NA et al (2017) Experience with the cardiac surgery simulation curriculum: results of the resident and faculty survey. Ann Thorac Surg 103(1):322–328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Stephenson ER Jr et al (1998) Robotically assisted microsurgery for endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 66(3):1064–1067

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Brecht R et al (2013) Transcatheter valve replacement: new concepts for microsurgery inside the heart. Innovations (Phila) 8(1):29–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Onan B, Bakir I (2016) Robotic mitral valve replacement in pectus excavatum. J Card Surg 31(5):306–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gudeloglu A, Brahmbhatt JV, Parekattil SJ (2014) Robotic-assisted microsurgery for an elective microsurgical practice. Semin Plastic Surg 28(1):11–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Willems JIP et al (2016) A comparison of robotically assisted microsurgery versus manual microsurgery in challenging situations. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(4):1317–1324

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pietro Bajona.

Ethics declarations

Funding

Supported by University of Pittsburgh Medical Center funds.

Conflict of interest

Nicholas S. Clarke, Johnathan Price, Travis Boyd, Stefano Salizzoni, Kenton J Zehr, Alejandro Nieponice, and Pietro Bajona have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clarke, N.S., Price, J., Boyd, T. et al. Robotic-assisted microvascular surgery: skill acquisition in a rat model. J Robotic Surg 12, 331–336 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0738-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0738-5

Keywords

Navigation