# Robotic Omental Flap Harvest for Complex Thoracic Defects: Case Series and Review of the Literature

## TL;DR

This paper introduces a robotic-assisted method for harvesting omental flaps to repair complex chest wall defects, offering a minimally invasive alternative with good outcomes.

## Contribution

The novel contribution is the use of robotic assistance for omental flap harvest in thoracic reconstruction, a minimally invasive alternative to traditional methods.

## Key findings

- Three patients successfully underwent robotic omental flap harvest with no flap-related complications.
- The average robotic harvest time was 79 minutes with minimal blood loss.
- All flaps remained viable at an average follow-up of 8 months.

## Abstract

Objective: The omentum is a highly vascularized and immunologically active tissue with significant regenerative potential. Despite its versatility, its use has traditionally been limited to intra-abdominal applications due to access challenges. Conventional open harvest requires laparotomy, and laparoscopic techniques are hindered by limited visualization and poor ergonomics. We describe the use of robotic-assisted omental flap harvest for thoracic reconstruction, offering a minimally invasive alternative. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent robotic omental flap harvest for intrathoracic reconstruction at a single-center institution between January 2023 and January 2024. Data collected included demographics, indications, surgical technique, operative details, and postoperative outcomes, with a focus on flap viability and complications. Additionally, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate current evidence and experiences with this type of technique. Results: Three patients underwent robotic omental flap harvest for indications including chest wall reconstruction and pleural space obliteration in infected thoracic cavities. The average robotic flap harvest time was 79 ± 13 min, with an estimated ± blood loss of 20 cc. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 10 days, influenced by the primary procedure and patient comorbidities. At an average follow-up of 8 months, all flaps remained viable, with no flap-related complications or losses. The systematic review demonstrated limited data in the current literature regarding this type of surgical approach. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted omental flap harvest is a safe, feasible, and effective technique for complex thoracic reconstructions. It provides a minimally invasive alternative to traditional harvest methods, with reduced morbidity and excellent clinical outcomes. This technique expands the reconstructive options for intrathoracic defects and infections.