Palavras-chave
Como Citar
Resumo
Introdução: A reconstrução mamária é fundamental no tratamento do câncer de mama, melhorando a recuperação física, emocional e a qualidade de vida das pacientes. Nesse sentido, as tecnologias robóticas têm revolucionado a reconstrução autóloga. Objetivo: Comparar a eficácia, segurança e desfechos estéticos das técnicas robóticas e convencionais na reconstrução mamária. Métodos: Consiste em uma revisão de escopo realizada através das bases Scopus, Embase, PubMed® e SciELO, utilizando os descritores: reconstrução mamária, robótica, cirurgia aberta, retalhos cirúrgicos. Foram incluídos estudos publicados nos últimos 12 anos, em idioma inglês, espanhol ou português, que abordassem a temática. Resultados e discussões: A abordagem robótica reduziu dor, complicações e cicatrizes, embora demande maior tempo operatório e infraestrutura. As técnicas convencionais continuam úteis em casos complexos, mas com mais complicações e menor benefício estético. Conclusão: As técnicas robóticas mostram vantagens estéticas e de recuperação na reconstrução mamária, apesar de desafios como custo e infraestrutura. As técnicas convencionais permanecem úteis em casos complexos, mas estudos futuros são essenciais para avaliar custo-benefício e desfechos a longo prazo.
Referências
BARZAMAN, K. et al. Breast cancer: biology, biomarkers, and treatments. International Immunopharmacology, v. 84, jul. 2020.
CHANG, E. I. et al. Comprehensive analysis of donor-site morbidity in abdominally based free flap breast reconstruction. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, v. 132, n. 6, p. 1383–1391, 2013.
CLEMENS, M. W.; KRONOWITZ, S.; SELBER, J. C. Robotic-assisted latissimus dorsi harvest in delayed-immediate breast reconstruction. Seminars in Plastic Surgery, v. 28, n. 1, p. 20-25, fev. 2014.
DE LORENZI, F. et al. Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for tumors larger than 2 centimeters: is it oncologically safe? A matched-cohort analysis. Annals of Surgical Oncology, v. 23, n. 6, p. 1852-1859, jun. 2016.
EO PS et al. Robot-assisted latissimus dorsi flap harvest for partial breast reconstruction: comparison with endoscopic and conventional approaches. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, v. 44, n. 1, p. 38-46, dez. 2023.
FAUCONNIER, M. et al. Comparison of postoperative complications following conventional latissimus dorsi flap versus muscle-sparing latissimus dorsi flap breast reconstruction. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, v. 75, n. 10, p. 3653–3663, 2022.
Hanson SE, Lei X, Roubaud MS, DeSnyder SM, Caudle AS, Shaitelman SF, Hoffman KE, Smith GL, Jagsi R, Peterson SK, Smith BD. Long-term Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer After Breast Conservation vs Mastectomy and Reconstruction. JAMA Surg. 2022 Jun 1;157(6):e220631.
HOUVENAEGHEL, G. et al. Robotic versus conventional latissimus dorsi-flap harvested for immediate breast reconstruction. Journal of Surgical Research, v. 4, n. 4, p. 749–764, 2021.
HOUVENAEGHEL, G. et al. Robotic-assisted skin sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction using latissimus dorsi flap: a new effective and safe technique: a comparative study. Surgical Oncology, v. 35, p. 406-411, dez. 2020.
KELSALL, J. E. et al. Comparing oncoplastic breast conserving surgery with mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: case-matched patient reported outcomes. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, v. 70, n. 10, p. 1377-1385, out. 2017.
LAI, H. W. et al. Robotic nipple sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with robotic latissimus dorsi flap harvest–technique and preliminary results. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, v. 71, n. 10, p. e59–e61, 2018.
LEE, M. J. et al. Clinical outcomes following robotic versus conventional DIEP flap in breast reconstruction: a retrospective matched study. Frontiers in Oncology, v. 12, p. 989231, 14 set. 2022.
PUSIC, A. L. et al. Patient-reported outcomes 1 year after immediate breast reconstruction: results of the mastectomy reconstruction outcomes consortium study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, v. 35, n. 22, p. 2499–2506, 2017.
Schaefer KM, Kappos EA, Haug M, Schaefer DJ. Brustrekonstruktion – der Einfluss des Verfahrens auf die Lebensqualität [Breast Reconstruction: Impact of the Procedure on Quality of Life]. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2022 Aug;54(4):349-355. German.
SELBER, J. C. The robotic DIEP flap. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, v. 145, n. 2, p. 340–343, 2020.
SELBER, J. C.; BAUMANN, D. P.; HOLSINGER, C. F. Robotic harvest of the latissimus dorsi muscle: laboratory and clinical experience. Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery, v. 28, n. 7, p. 457–464, 2012.
Shah V, Soh CL, Chhatwal K, Kucharczak J, Airapetyan AA, Avavde D, Torabi S, Mackenzie A, Miller G, Vardanyan R, Arjomandi Rad A, Malawana J. Autologous breast reconstruction in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): a systematic review of current practices and challenges. Minerva Surg. 2024 Feb;79(1):73-81.
SOOD, R. et al. Latissimus dorsi flap in breast reconstruction: recent innovations in the workhorse flap. Cancer Control, v. 25, n. 1, p. 1073274817744638, 2018.
TSAI, C. Y. et al. Novel port placement in robot-assisted DIEP flap harvest improves visibility and bilateral DIEP access: early controlled cohort study. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, v. 152, n. 4, p. 590e-595e, out. 2023.
WINOCOUR, S. et al. Comparing outcomes of robotically assisted latissimus dorsi harvest to the traditional open approach in breast reconstruction. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, v. 146, n. 6, p. 1221-1225, dez. 2020.
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Gustavo José Araújo Bezerra, Joaquim Thomaz Pereira Diegues Neto
