The Art and Science of Pediatric Tumor Reconstruction Surgery: A Comprehensive Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt2023467Keywords:
Pediatric Oncology, Reconstructive Surgical Procedures, Tumor Resection, Minimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresAbstract
Introduction: pediatric tumor reconstruction surgery stands at the intersection of multiple disciplines, demanding a unique blend of surgical expertise, technological innovation, and a thorough understanding of pediatric oncology. With the evolution of surgical techniques, advanced imaging modalities, and the advent of minimally invasive and robotic surgery, the landscape of pediatric tumor reconstruction has seen substantial transformations.
Objective: this review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state and future directions in pediatric tumor reconstruction surgery, shedding light on the art and science of this complex discipline, and outlining the necessity of multidisciplinary collaboration for improved patient outcomes.
Methods: a systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar databases with the terms "Pediatric Oncology", "Reconstructive Surgery", "Tumor Surgery", "Minimally Invasive Surgery", "Robotic Surgery", "Surgical Outcomes", and "Quality of Life". The search included articles from 2004-2023.
Results: findings from the review reveal a trend towards minimally invasive and robotic surgery, offering the potential for less invasive treatment options and better recovery for patients. Advancements in technology have played a significant role, with photodynamic therapy, near-infrared photoimmunotherapy, and fluorescent-guided surgery providing new tools for local and regional cancer treatment.
Conclusions: pediatric tumor reconstruction surgery continues to evolve with advancements in surgical techniques and the integration of innovative technology. The field presents promising future directions, but further research is needed, particularly concerning new treatments, understanding local relapse, and enhancing postoperative quality of life
References
1. Pio L, Sarnacki S. Editorial: Innovative approaches in pediatric surgical oncology. Frontiers in Pediatrics. 2022;10. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.989822
2. Alcocer Alkureishi L, Alkureishi L. Topics in Pediatric Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Pediatr Ann. 2023;52(1):e8–9.
3. Adamson PA. Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: Our International Future. Facial Plast Surg. 2021;37(5):688–90.
4. Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol [Internet]. 2010;25(9):603–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z
5. Purssell E. Can the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme check-lists be used alongside Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to improve transparency and decision-making? J Adv Nurs. 2020;76(4):1082–9.
6. Kulkarni DV, Parelkar SV, Tiwari P, Sanghvi BV, Gupta RK, Mudkhedkar KP, et al. Multidisciplinary Approach for Management of Pediatric Tumors: a Case Series. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2020;11(3):398–400.
7. Phelps HM, Lovvorn HN. Minimally Invasive Surgery in Pediatric Surgical Oncology. Children (Basel). 2018;5(12):158.
8. Scollon S, Anglin AK, Thomas M, Turner JT, Wolfe Schneider K. A Comprehensive Review of Pediatric Tumors and Associated Cancer Predisposition Syndromes. J Genet Couns. 2017;26(3):387–434.
9. Kastenberg Z, Dutta S. Guidelines for innovation in pediatric surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2011;21(4):371–4.
10. Lerwick JL. Psychosocial implications of pediatric surgical hospitalization. Semin Pediatr Surg. 2013;22(3):129–33.
11. Carlisle EM, Shinkunas LA, Lieberman MT, Hoffman RM, Reisinger HS. Empowering parents of pediatric surgical oncology patients through collaborative engagement with surgeons. J Pediatr Surg. 2022;S0022-3468(22)00833-8.
12. Dasgupta R, Billmire D, Aldrink JH, Meyers RL. What is new in pediatric surgical oncology? Curr Opin Pediatr. 2017;29(1):3–11.
13. Baum P, Lenzi J, Taber S, Winter H, Wiegering A. Quality versus quantity in surgical oncology - what is the future? Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2022;19(5):356.
14. Schor EL, Bergman D. Pediatric Preventive Care: Population Health and Individualized Care. Pediatrics. 2021;148(3):e2020049877.
15. Park JE, Chang DW. Advances and Innovations in Microsurgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(5):915e–24e.
16. Tatum SA. Pediatric facial plastic and reconstructive surgery. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2014;22(4):xiii.
17. Rove KO, Edney JC, Brockel MA. Enhanced recovery after surgery in children: Promising, evidence-based multidisciplinary care. Paediatr Anaesth. 2018;28(6):482–92.
18. Salaün JP, Ecoffey C, Orliaguet G. Enhanced recovery in children: how could we go further? World J Pediatr Surg. 2021;4(2):e000288.
19. Anthony SJ, Selkirk E, Sung L, Klaassen RJ, Dix D, Klassen AF. Quality of life of pediatric oncology patients: Do patient-reported outcome instruments measure what matters to patients? Qual Life Res. 2017;26(2):273–81.
20. Clarke SA, Eiser C. The measurement of health-related quality of life (QOL) in paediatric clinical trials: a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:66
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Erick Josue Fabre Morales, César Augusto Guzmán Canaba, Lissette Brigitte Llerena Chicaiza, Dipaola Pamela Pino Vaca, Lenin Stalin Muñoz Villacres, Carlos Alexander Romero Córdova, Hailyn Isabella Villarreal Díaz, Andrea Mishell Rodríguez Coloma, Álvaro Andrés Lucero Carrera (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
