title: A Comparison of Robotically Assisted Microsurgery versus Manual Microsurgery in Challenging Situations.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Microsurgery can be challenging secondary to orientation of the vessels, accessibility, or depth of the wound. Robotically assisted microsurgery reduces tremors and improves visualization and may improve the quality of anastomosis compared with traditional microsurgery. The purpose of this study was to compare robotically assisted microsurgery to traditional microsurgery in technically challenging situations with respect to time of anastomosis, quality of anastomosis, and Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two investigators with no prior surgery or microsurgery experience performed 160 anastomoses on artificial microvessels after undergoing standardized traditional and robotically assisted microsurgery courses. Five different exposure groups were created with depths of 0, 10, and 20 cm and sidewall angles of 20 and 30 degrees. A comparison of 80 manual with 80 robotically assisted microsurgery anastomoses in different exposure groups was undertaken. The modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills scoring system, duration per anastomosis, and a subjective comfort scale were evaluated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In the most difficult exposure, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills scores were similar in both groups (p = 0.98), the duration was higher in the manual group (p = 0.004), and the subjective comfort rating was higher in the robotically assisted microsurgery group (p < 0.001). In the easiest (0-cm depth, flat) exposure, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills scores were higher in the manual group (p = 0.018) and the duration was longer in the robotically assisted microsurgery group (p = 0.008).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Manual surgery was superior to robotically assisted microsurgery in technically easy exposures. In difficult exposures (greater depth and lower sidewall angles), however, robotically assisted microsurgery had a shorter surgery time and a higher comfort rating, with Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills scores similar to those assessing traditional microsurgery.
  
  
  METHODS
  Therapeutic, V.
authors.affiliation: Rochester, Minn.|From the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Microvascular Research Laboratory, Mayo Clinic.
authors.forename: Joost I P
authors.initials: JIP
authors.lastname: Willems
authors.affiliation: Rochester, Minn.|From the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Microvascular Research Laboratory, Mayo Clinic.
authors.forename: Alexandra M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Shin
authors.affiliation: Rochester, Minn.|From the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Microvascular Research Laboratory, Mayo Clinic.
authors.forename: Delaney M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Shin
authors.affiliation: Rochester, Minn.|From the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Microvascular Research Laboratory, Mayo Clinic.
authors.forename: Allen T
authors.initials: AT
authors.lastname: Bishop
authors.affiliation: Rochester, Minn.|From the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Microvascular Research Laboratory, Mayo Clinic.
authors.forename: Alexander Y
authors.initials: AY
authors.lastname: Shin
mesh_terms: D000714:Anastomosis, Surgical / Q000379:methods; D002983:Clinical Competence; D006801:Humans; D008866:Microsurgery / Q000379:methods*; D055806:Microvessels / Q000601:surgery*; D008953:Models, Anatomic; D061646:Operative Time; D011897:Random Allocation; D065287:Robotic Surgical Procedures