Zhang, Casey

Abstract While the launch of the da Vinci Surgical System catalyzed the expansion of robotic surgery across disciplines, adoption in plastic surgery remains modest. To explore this disconnect, this study surveys plastic surgeons to gauge interest, utilization, and perceived barriers to robotic surgery adoption. A 15-question survey on training, access, interest, and barriers to robotic procedures was developed on Qualtrics and distributed via email to members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) in May 2024. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses. About 123 responses were collected among 3,512 survey recipients. Among respondents, 84.6% reported having access to a surgical robot; however, only 13.8% had training on robotic systems during residency, and only 12.2% utilized the technology for plastic surgery procedures. Interest in robotics was noted among 47.9% of respondents, particularly for deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap procedures (65.5%), rectus/Vertical Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous (VRAM) flap (58.2%), and hernia repairs (27.3%). Key barriers to adoption included training requirements (63.9%), lack of demand (60.2%), increased operative time (54.6%), and financial concerns (26.9%). Additional obstacles cited were credentialing difficulties and skepticism about the necessity of robotics in plastic surgery. The present survey identified inadequate training, high costs, and limited demand as key barriers to the adoption of robotics in plastic surgery, reflecting the current lack of robotic integration into residency curricula, as well as the substantial investment and maintenance costs associated with robotic systems. Nevertheless, the strong interest in robotics highlights the need for expanded training programs, promotion of clinical benefits, and research quantifying potential downstream savings to overcome these barriers.

Background Immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IIBR) is the most commonly used method in breast reconstruction in the United States. However, postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs) can cause devastating reconstructive failure. This study evaluates the use of perioperative versus extended courses of antibiotic prophylaxis after IIBR for the prevention of SSI. Methods This is a single-institution retrospective study of patients who underwent IIBR between June 2018 and April 2020. Detailed demographic and clinical information was collected. Patients were divided into subgroups based on antibiotic prophylaxis regimen: group 1 consisted of patients who received 24 hours of perioperative antibiotics and group 2 consisted of patients who received ≥7 days of antibiotics. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSSv26.0 with P ≤ 0.05 considered statistically significant. Results A total of 169 patients (285 breasts) who underwent IIBR were included. The mean age was 52.4 ± 10.2 years, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 26.8 ± 5.7 kg/m2. Twenty-five percent of patients (25.6%) underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy, 69.1% skin-sparing mastectomy, and 5.3% total mastectomy. The implant was placed in the prepectoral, subpectoral, and dual planes in 16.7%, 19.2%, and 64.1% cases, respectively. Acellular dermal matrix was used in 78.7% of cases. A total of 42.0% of patients received 24-hour prophylaxis (group 1), and 58.0% of patients received extended prophylaxis (group 2). Twenty-five infections (14.8%) were identified, of which 9 (5.3%) resulted in reconstructive failure. In bivariate analyses, no significant difference was found between groups in rates of infection (P = 0.273), reconstructive failure (P = 0.653), and seroma (P = 0.125). There was a difference in hematoma rates between groups (P = 0.046). Interestingly, in patients who received only perioperative antibiotics, infection rates were significantly higher in those with BMI ≥ 25 (25.6% vs 7.1%, P = 0.050). There was no difference in overweight patients who received extended antibiotics (16.4% vs 7.0%, P = 0.160). Conclusions Our data demonstrate no statistical difference in infection rates between perioperative and extended antibiotics. This suggests that the efficacies of current prophylaxis regimens are largely similar, with choice of regimen based on surgeon preference and patient-specific considerations. Infection rates in patients who received perioperative prophylaxis and were overweight were significantly higher, suggesting that BMI should be taken into consideration when choosing a prophylaxis regimen.