Dataset Information

Abdominal Flap-based Breast Reconstruction versus Abdominoplasty: The Impact of Surgical Procedure on Scar Location.

ABSTRACT: Background:Autologous breast reconstruction has been demonstrated to be associated with superior patient-reported outcomes, and hence is regarded as the gold standard reconstructive modality. A common drawback of this procedure, however, is related to a high abdominal scar. Recently, hybrid breast reconstruction (ie, the combination of autologous and implant-based reconstruction) was presented as an approach that would combine the benefits of both reconstructive modalities. In this study, we sought to assess abdominal aesthetic outcomes associated with this approach. Methods:Thirty-two blinded reviewers evaluated standardized pre- and postoperative abdominal images of patients following autologous reconstruction with free abdominal flap (Group 1; N = 10), hybrid reconstruction (Group 2; N = 5), and abdominoplasty (Group 3; N = 10). Aesthetic abdominal appearance, including overall result, scar position, skin redundancy, and lateral abdominal contour, was rated on a 5-point Likert scale and a comparative analysis was performed. Results:Hybrid reconstruction was associated with significantly lower abdominal scars compared with Group 1 (P = 0.01), nearing results of patients in Group 3 (P = 0.39). Significantly higher aesthetic ratings were ascribed to Groups 2 and 3 when compared with Group 1 (P < 0.001) with regard to scar positioning (P < 0.001), skin redundancy (P < 0.001), and lateral abdominal contour (P < 0.001). No significant difference in aesthetic ratings was noted between Groups 2 and 3. Conclusions:When applied to the appropriate patient population, hybrid breast reconstruction is a powerful method to achieve reconstructive goals while optimizing abdominal aesthetics. A significantly lower scar position was noted and higher abdominal aesthetic ratings were given following abdominoplasty and hybrid reconstruction compared with conventional abdominal flap-based reconstruction.

SUBMITTER: Li AY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7544165 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Abdominal Flap-based Breast Reconstruction versus Abdominoplasty: The Impact of Surgical Procedure on Scar Location.

Li Alexander Y AY Momeni Arash A

Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open 20200924 9

<h4>Background</h4>Autologous breast reconstruction has been demonstrated to be associated with superior patient-reported outcomes, and hence is regarded as the gold standard reconstructive modality. A common drawback of this procedure, however, is related to a high abdominal scar. Recently, hybrid breast reconstruction (ie, the combination of autologous and implant-based reconstruction) was presented as an approach that would combine the benefits of both reconstructive modalities. In this study ...[more]

PMID: 33133961

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBreast reconstruction using the latissimus dorsi (LD) flap is one of the most popular and common breast reconstruction techniques among Asian patients. There are increasing numbers of cases wherein breasts need to be reconstructed to moderate to large sizes among the Asian population. Most reconstructive surgeons use abdominal-based flaps-such as the deep inferior epigastric perforator and transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap, or LD flap with an implant-to supplement the volume. Here, we compare the usefulness of the boomerang LD (bLD) flap-a technique developed by modifying the design of the conventional extended LD flap-with that of the LD flap with implant (LDi).MethodsThis was a prospective cohort study including patients with breast cancer aged between 25 and 60 years who underwent unilateral total or skin/nipple-sparing mastectomy, or postmastectomy. The exclusion criteria were advanced breast cancer (stages 3 and 4); a history of cognitive impairment affecting ability to complete the self-reported questionnaire; a history of neurologic or musculoskeletal disorder; and a history of alcohol or drug abuse. Statistical analysis was performed, and correlations between the two technique types were analyzed [including age, body mass index, preoperative breast volume, operation time, flap elevation time, admission duration, adjuvant treatment (radiotherapy, chemotherapy), drain indwelling duration, and drain total sum volume].ResultsIn total, 85 patients who underwent immediate breast construction through the LDi group (n=63) or bLD group (n=25) techniques after total mastectomy between January 2015 and June 2022 were analyzed (mean age: LDi group, 46±7.7 years; bLD group, 45.6±7.8 years). We observed that the flap weight, operative time, mean admission duration, and drain indwelling duration were statistically significantly different in the bLD group (P<0.05). Body mass index, preoperative breast volume, specimen weight, flap elevation time, and drain total time were comparable between groups.ConclusionsBreast reconstruction using the bLD flap was found to be a suitable alternative technique for patients who desire an autologous tissue transfer (rather than an implant) but are contraindicated for abdominal-based flaps and do not mind long postoperative scars.

Project description:Background: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women. The interdisciplinary treatment is based on the histological tumor type, the TNM classification, and the patient's wishes. Following tumor resection and (neo-) adjuvant therapy strategies, breast reconstruction represents the final step in the individual interdisciplinary treatment plan. Although manifold flaps have been described, abdominal free flaps, such as the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) or the muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (ms-TRAM) flap, are the current gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction. This retrospective study focuses on the safety of autologous breast reconstruction upon mastectomy using abdominal free flaps. Methods: From April 2012 until December 2018, 193 women received 217 abdominal free flaps for autologous breast reconstruction at the University Hospital of Erlangen. For perforator mapping, we performed computed tomography angiography (CTA). Venous anastomosis was standardized using a ring pin coupler system, and flap perfusion was assessed with fluorescence angiography. A retrospective analysis was performed based on medical records, the surgery report, and follow-up of outpatient course. Results: In most cases, autologous breast reconstruction was performed as a secondary reconstructive procedure after mastectomy and radiotherapy. In total, 132 ms1-TRAM, 23 ms2-TRAM, and 62 DIEP flaps were performed with 21 major complications (10%) during hospital stay including five free flap losses (2.3%). In all cases of free flap loss, we found an arterial thrombosis as the main cause. In 24 patients a bilateral breast reconstruction was performed without free flap loss. The majority of free flaps (96.7%) did not need additional supercharging or turbocharging to improve venous outflow. Median venous coupler size was 2.5 mm (range, 1.5-3.5 mm). Conclusion: Using CTA, intraoperative fluorescence angiography, titanized hernia meshes for rectus sheath reconstruction, and venous coupler systems, autologous breast reconstruction with DIEP or ms-TRAM free flaps is a safe and standardized procedure in high-volume microsurgery centers.

Dataset Information

Abdominal Flap-based Breast Reconstruction versus Abdominoplasty: The Impact of Surgical Procedure on Scar Location.

Publications

Abdominal Flap-based Breast Reconstruction versus Abdominoplasty: The Impact of Surgical Procedure on Scar Location.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets