Latest News

The robot comes to mastectomy, but cancer outcomes data not attached


 

Surgeons only get one body

Intuitive has been hugely successful in developing and marketing its da Vinci system around the world for general and oncologic surgeries, with more than 1 million surgeries in 2018, a greater than sevenfold increase in 10 years, according to the authors of a new essay published in the June issue of the Annals of Surgery. The authors include breast surgeon Rosa F. Hwang, MD, of MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, who is also an investigator for the Intuitive trial.

However, robotic mastectomy is still a new surgery – only about 150 patients have been treated in the world, mostly in Italy, France, Taiwan, and Korea, the authors noted.

Despite such small numbers, “there’s a lot of interest in bringing this to the United States,” said Dr. Park.

One of the arguments in favor of robotic mastectomy for nipple-sparing procedures has nothing to do with patients. Instead, it is improved ergonomics – the robot makes a tough surgery easier on the surgeon.

Even stalwart robot critic Dr. Margenthaler conceded that this was possibly a winning feature.

“Nipple-sparing mastectomy is a very physically demanding procedure for the surgeon, resulting in higher rates of neck and back pain and fatigue compared with a standard skin-sparing approach,” she noted. She suggested, however, that practitioners of traditional mastectomy ought to first experiment with changes to patient positioning and incision placement to alleviate stress before looking to the robot for change.

When this news organization interviewed NorthShore University’s Dr. Kopkash, she had conducted four nipple-sparing mastectomies in the previous week. “It’s a difficult procedure on our bodies. I just turned 40 and I’m considered young for a surgeon. We get one body for our career and we have to figure out ways to make it work and protect it.”

Intuitive Surgical is funding the five-center clinical trial of robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy, and UT Southwestern is funding its own trial. The Ohio State trial is funded by the university and a Pelotonia Idea Grant. Dr. Noorchashm and Dr. Margenthaler have no relevant financial disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Internet-based interventions do not reduce fear of breast cancer recurrence
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
HER-2-negative BRCA-mutated breast cancer: Olaparib effective in real world
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
TNBC: Trop-2 expression is a potential biomarker for sacituzumab govitecan activity
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Breast cancer: Young women likely to receive guideline-concordant care
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Rapid update to ASCO breast cancer guidelines after OlympiA data
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
No increase in breast cancer risk with fertility treatments
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
CDC notes sharp declines in breast and cervical cancer screening
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Huge trial casts doubt on bisphosphonates for breast cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Therapeutic Approaches in Advanced Breast Cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Cancer mortality continues to drop in females as breast cancer reversal looms
MDedge Hematology and Oncology