Table 2 Current application and future development of robotic surgery in head and neck non-malignant diseases
From: Robotic surgical systems in maxillofacial surgery: a review
Patients | Superiority | Limitations | Future development |
---|---|---|---|
Low damage to the vascularization and related innervation of surrounding muscles, quick function recovery | Long surgical duration | More high-quality clinical investigation | |
Maxillofacail fracture | Insufficient data | Insufficient data | Specific design of related robotic surgical system |
Insufficient data | Insufficient data | Transition from theoretical feasibility to clinical application | |
Low intropetative bleeding and tracheotomy, decreased postoperative pain, hospital stay as well as incidence of dysphagia | Unstable cure rate varies from 45% to 90%, significant postoperative lingual oedema and transient hypogeusia | Combination of robotic resection of BOT and conventional surgery like uvulopalatopharyngoplasty or sphincter pharyngoplasty | |
Others | |||
Laryngeal clefts129 | In common; minimal damage to surrounding normal tissues as well as speech and swallow function; excellent aesthetics | Laryngeal lefts: unsatisfactory cure rate | Laryngeal lefts: application of specific miniaturized instruments to obtain enough surgical space |
Laryngocele130 | Laryngocele: short operative time | ||
Ectopic lingual thyroid: short operative time and low recurrence | |||
Ptyalolithiasis: high cure rate and low lingual nerve damage rate | |||
Vascular lesion136 |