The coincidence of TRAM flaps and prostheses in the setting of breast reconstruction

It is well known that transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flaps can be used to replace unsatisfactory prosthetic breast reconstructions; however, little has been written about the scope of breast implant use in TRAM flap patients. In this study, to ascertain the range of such therapeutic options, their frequency, and their clinical outcomes, the authors retrospectively reviewed the senior author's breast reconstruction experience from 1989 to 2000 with patients in whom both a TRAM flap and an implant were used for breast reconstruction. The authors examined the surgical indications, body habitus, bra size, chest wall irradiation history, flap type, implant type, complications, and outcomes for those patients with TRAM flap and breast implant combinations.Thirty-two women who had 50 (various) combinations of a TRAM flap and a breast implant were identified. There were more clinical scenarios than patients because many of the women had multiple scenarios. The 50 combination scenarios were then divided into six groups. Group I consisted of 14 patients who had elective prostheses placed beneath simultaneous TRAM flaps; group II consisted of 10 patients who had TRAM flaps with contralateral prosthetic reconstruction (in which two implants were received before the TRAM flaps, five implants were received simultaneously with the TRAM flaps, and three implants were received after the TRAM flaps); group III consisted of eight patients who had contralateral augmentation in addition to their TRAM flaps; group IV consisted of 11 patients who had TRAM flaps that were used to cover or replace previous prosthetic reconstructions; group V consisted of four patients in whom prostheses were used to augment or improve previous TRAM flap reconstructions; and group VI consisted of three patients who required prostheses to either reconstruct or salvage total or near-total TRAM flap failures. A broad range of implant types was used, although anatomic saline implants predominated. Forty-one percent of the patients in the review had undergone irradiation during the course of their treatment for breast cancer. Eight of the 32 patients experienced a total of twelve complications, four of which were related to the implants and eight of which involved the TRAM flaps and abdominal donor sites.Although complex, the wide variety of potential TRAM flap/breast implant combinations can be useful for patients with challenging reconstructive scenarios, particularly those that involve radiation therapy. In the group of patients reviewed by the authors, TRAM flaps were most often used in successful partnership either on the same side as or opposite to an implant reconstruction. A TRAM flap was used to salvage or replace an unsatisfactory implant reconstruction in less than a third of the patients. From a risk point of view, implants used opposite a TRAM flap reconstruction had a lower incidence of complication than did implants used beneath TRAM flaps.     

Outcome comparison between free and pedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction in the obese patient.

Obesity can be a contraindication for TRAM flap breast reconstruction. This study reviewed the authors' experience with free TRAM and pedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction in the obese patient to examine the complication rates associated with each reconstructive method and to determine whether TRAM flap reconstruction can safely be used in these high-risk patients. The records of 221 consecutive TRAM flap reconstructions were reviewed. Preoperative risk factors for morbidity were noted, as well as the incidence of TRAM flap success, operative time, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Patients were categorized as obese if their body mass index was greater than 25.8 kg/m2. Data were tabulated using contingency tables and analyzed using chi-squared statistics. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for flap complications.Of the 221 patients studied, 114 patients were found to be obese (body mass index >25.8 kg/m2). Of these 114 patients, 78 were reconstructed with free TRAM flaps and 36 were reconstructed with pedicled flaps. In these obese patients, the average body mass index was 32 kg/m2 in the free TRAM and 30 kg/m2 in the pedicled TRAM flap reconstructions. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to age or preoperative risk factors. Length of hospital stay and operative time did not differ significantly between the two reconstructive methods. The average duration of follow-up was 24 months in both groups. Complications occurred in 26 percent of free TRAM flap reconstructions and 33 percent of pedicled reconstructions. There was no significant difference between reconstructive methods with regard to overall complication rates. Increasing body mass index was found to have a significant effect on free TRAM flap complications (p = 0.008) but not on pedicled TRAM flap complications. There were no partial or total flap losses in obese free TRAM flap patients; however, there was one case of total flap loss and four cases of partial flap loss in the obese pedicled TRAM flap group. The incidence of flap loss was significantly higher when pedicled TRAM flaps were used for reconstruction in obese patients (p = 0.04). Obese patients who underwent reconstruction with pedicled TRAM flaps were more likely to experience a complication if they also smoked (p = 0.001).There was no significant difference in operating time or length of stay when pedicled and free TRAM flap reconstructions in obese patients were compared. There were more cases of flap necrosis in the pedicled TRAM flap group. Free TRAM flaps may provide some benefit in reducing partial flap loss in obese patients, but overall complication rates were not significantly different between reconstructive methods. Of 114 patients, there was only one case of total reconstructive failure. From these findings, it seems that the free or pedicled TRAM flap can be used successfully for breast reconstruction in the majority of patients with obesity. Surgeons should use the technique with which they are most familiar to obtain consistent results.     

Breast cancer after augmentation mammaplasty: treatment by skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction

Breast conservation has been associated with poor cosmetic outcome when used to treat breast cancer in patients who have undergone prior augmentation mammaplasty. Radiation therapy of the augmented breast can increase breast fibrosis and capsular contraction. Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction are examined as an alternative treatment.Six patients with prior breast augmentation were treated for breast cancer by skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. One patient underwent a contralateral prophylactic skin-sparing mastectomy. Silicone gel implants had been placed in the submuscular location in five patients and in the subglandular position in one patient a mean of 10.2 years (range, 6 to 20 years) before breast cancer diagnosis. The mean patient age was 41.3 years (range, 33 to 56 years). Four independent judges reviewed postoperative photographs to grade the aesthetic results in comparison with the opposite native or reconstructed breast.The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging was stage 0 in one patient, stage I for four patients, and stage II for one patient. Five of the six patients presented with a palpable breast mass. Latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction was performed in four patients (bilaterally in one) and a transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flap was used in two patients. Three patients were treated by skin-sparing mastectomy with preservation of the breast implant (two patients with latissimus flaps, and one patient with a TRAM flap). The tumor location necessitated the removal of implants in two patients (one patient with a latissimus flap and one with a TRAM. A saline implant was placed under the latissimus flap after gel implant removal. The patient who underwent bilateral skin-sparing mastectomies desired explantation and placement of saline implants. No remedial surgery was performed on the opposite breast to achieve symmetry. Complications occurred in two patients at the latissimus dorsi donor site (seroma in one patient, and seroma and infection in one). Five patients underwent complete nipple reconstructions. The mean duration of follow-up was 33.6 months (range, 15.5 to 70.3 months), and there were no recurrences of breast cancer. The aesthetic results were judged to be good to excellent in all cases.Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction can be used in patients with prior breast augmentation, with good to excellent cosmetic results. Depending on the tumor and implant location, the implant may be preserved without compromising local control.     

Quality of life, patients' satisfaction, and aesthetic outcome after pedicled or free TRAM flap breast surgery

Breast reconstructions after breast cancer surgery are primarily performed to improve patients' quality of life. This study was performed to investigate patients' satisfaction with breast reconstruction and quality of life after pedicled or free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap surgery and to evaluate the aesthetic result of the breast reconstruction both objectively and subjectively.Sixty-three patients (36 with pedicled flaps and 27 with free TRAM flaps) answered two questionnaires; of this group, 53 (27 with pedicled flaps and 26 with free TRAM flaps) participated in an aesthetic evaluation. The questionnaires consisted of two parts: one study-specific part concerning satisfaction with the result of the breast reconstruction, the other a standardized health-related quality of life part, the Short Form-36 questionnaire. The aesthetic examination consisted of an objective part in which various distances on the reconstructed and contralateral breast were measured. The volumes of the breasts were measured using a thermoplastic cast system. The softness of the breasts was assessed using applanation tonometry. A panel consisting of three plastic surgeons looked at four standardized photographs of each patient and evaluated the aesthetic outcome subjectively. The panel evaluated the breast reconstruction on 10 subscales. No statistically significant difference between the surgical groups was seen regarding the patients' satisfaction with the reconstruction. In the patients' self-assessment of the cosmetic outcome, the degree of symmetry was assessed higher in the free TRAM flap group. The health-related quality of life Short Form-36 questionnaire revealed no difference between the pedicled and free flap groups. Compared with a reference population, the breast-reconstructed group felt more tired and "worn out," less peaceful, more unhappy, and more restless. The free flap group reached a higher degree of symmetry in the objective evaluation and received generally higher scores from the three-member panel, compared with the pedicled TRAM flap group. A strong correlation between the patients' and the panel's evaluations of the cosmetic outcome was seen; generally, the panel's evaluation of the cosmetic result of the breast correlated with the satisfaction of the patients.     

Optimizing autologous breast reconstruction in thin patients

Breast reconstruction with a transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap plus an implant has been proposed as an option for women with a thin body habitus who do not have sufficient abdominal tissue to permit reconstruction with a TRAM flap alone. The standard autologous tissue reconstructive procedure in these women is a combined latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap and breast implant. We reviewed our experience performing TRAM flap/implant and latissimus dorsi flap/implant breast reconstruction to compare complication rates and aesthetic outcomes between these two types of reconstruction. Between 1992 and 1999, 88 breasts were reconstructed at our institution using an autologous tissue flap combined with a breast implant (44 with a TRAM flap/implant and 44 with a latissimus dorsi flap/implant). Recipient-site and donor-site complications for the two procedures were compared using Fisher's exact test; a panel of unbiased, blinded judges compared the aesthetic outcomes. The recipient-site complication rate was lower for the TRAM flap/implant group than for the latissimus dorsi flap/implant group (18 percent versus 34 percent, p = 0.09). Most recipient-site complications in the TRAM flap/implant group were related to fluid collection around the implant. In the TRAM flap/implant group, complications occurred in 37 percent of the reconstructions that had immediate implant placement and in none of the reconstructions with delayed implant placement (p = 0.01). In the TRAM flap/implant reconstructions with immediate implant placement, the recipient-site complication rate was 50 percent when implants were completely filled with saline, but no complications occurred with incompletely filled, postoperatively adjustable implants (p = 0.03). No microvascular complications occurred with immediate placement of breast implants under TRAM flaps. Donor-site complications included a hematoma, a seroma, and an umbilical necrosis in the TRAM flap/implant group and six cases of seroma formation in the latissimus dorsi flap/implant group. The comparison of aesthetic outcome was statistically significant for the TRAM flap/implant group, which had a higher overall mean score than the latissimus dorsi flap/implant group did (3.29 versus 2.85, p = 0.01). The results of this study suggest that the TRAM flap/implant breast reconstruction should be considered as an alternative to the latissimus dorsi flap/implant breast reconstruction in women with a thin body habitus.     

Postoperative adjuvant irradiation: effects on tranverse rectus abdominis muscle flap breast reconstruction

The use of postoperative irradiation following oncologic breast surgery is dictated by tumor pathology, margins, and lymph node involvement. Although irradiation negatively influences implant reconstruction, it is less clear what effect it has on autogenous tissue. This study evaluated the effect of postoperative irradiation on transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flap breast reconstruction. A retrospective review was performed on all patients undergoing immediate TRAM flap breast reconstruction followed by postoperative irradiation between 1988 and 1998. Forty-one patients with a median age of 48 years received an average of 50.99 Gy of fractionated irradiation within 6 months after breast reconstruction. All except two received adjuvant chemotherapy. Data were obtained from personal communication, physical examination, chart, and photographic review. The minimum follow-up time was 1 year, with an average of 3 years, after completion of radiation therapy. Nine patients received pedicled TRAM flaps and 32 received reconstruction with microvascular transfer. Fourteen patients had bilateral reconstruction, but irradiation was administered unilaterally to the breast with the higher risk of local recurrence. The remaining 27 patients had unilateral reconstruction. All patients were examined at least 1 year after radiotherapy. No flap loss occurred, but 10 patients (24 percent) required an additional flap to correct flap contracture. Nine patients (22 percent) maintained a normal breast volume. Hyperpigmentation occurred in 37 percent of the patients, and 56 percent were noted to have a firm reconstruction. Palpable fat necrosis was noted in 34 percent of the flaps and loss of symmetry in 78 percent. Because the numbers were small, there was no statistical difference between the pedicled and free TRAM group. However, as a group, the findings were statistically significant when compared with 1,443 nonirradiated TRAM patients. Despite the success of flap transfer, unpredictable volume, contour, and symmetry loss make it difficult to achieve consistent results using immediate TRAM breast reconstruction with postoperative irradiation. TRAM flap reconstruction in this setting should be approached cautiously, and delayed reconstruction in selected patients should be considered. Patients should be aware that multiple revisions and, possibly, additional flaps are necessary to correct the progressive deformity from radiation therapy.     

Breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery flaps: a prospective comparison with TRAM and DIEP flaps

Breast reconstruction using the lower abdominal free superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flap has the potential to virtually eliminate abdominal donor-site morbidity because the rectus abdominis fascia and muscle are not incised or excised. However, despite its advantages, the free SIEA flap for breast reconstruction is rarely used. A prospective study was conducted of the reliability and outcomes of the use of SIEA flaps for breast reconstruction compared with transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. Breast reconstruction with an SIEA flap was attempted in 47 consecutive free autologous tissue breast reconstructions between August of 2001 and November of 2002. The average patient age was 49 years, and the average body mass index was 27 kg/m. The SIEA flap was used in 14 (30 percent) of these breast reconstructions in 12 patients. An SIEA flap was not used in the remaining 33 cases because the SIEA was absent or was deemed too small. The mean superficial inferior epigastric vessel pedicle length was approximately 7 cm. The internal mammary vessels were used as recipients in all SIEA flap cases so that the flap could be positioned sufficiently medially on the chest wall. The average hospital stay was significantly shorter for patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction with SIEA flaps than it was for those who underwent reconstruction with TRAM or DIEP flaps. Of the 47 free flaps, one SIEA flap was lost because of arterial thrombosis. Medium-size and large breasts were reconstructed with hemi-lower abdominal SIEA flaps, with aesthetic results similar to those obtained with TRAM and DIEP flaps. The free SIEA flap is an attractive option for autologous tissue breast reconstruction. Harvest of this flap does not injure the anterior rectus fascia or underlying rectus abdominis muscle. This can potentially eliminate abdominal donor-site complications such as bulge and hernia formation, and decrease weakness, discomfort, and hospital stay compared with TRAM and DIEP flaps. The disadvantages of an SIEA flap are a smaller pedicle diameter and shorter pedicle length than TRAM and DIEP flaps and the absence or inadequacy of an arterial pedicle in most patients. Nevertheless, in selected patients, the SIEA flap offers advantages over the TRAM and DIEP flaps for breast reconstruction.     

Determinants of patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction

In today's increasingly competitive health care marketplace, consumer satisfaction has become an important measure of quality. Furthermore, measures of satisfaction with treatment inteerventions are influential factors in determining patients' and payers' choices of health care. This study sought to evaluate satisfaction with postmastectomy breast reconstruction and to assess the effects of procedure type and timing on patient satisfaction. As part of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study, patients undergoing first-time mastectomy reconstruction were prospectively evaluated, including cohorts of women choosing expander/implant, pedicle TRFAM flap, and free TRAM flap procedures. Preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively, participants completed a questionnaire that collected a variety of health status information. The postoperative questionnaire had an additional seven items assessing both general satisfaction with reconstruction (five items) and aesthetic satisfaction (two items) as separate subscales. Patients were asked to respond to each item using a five-point Likert scale. Item responses ranged from 1, indicating high satisfaction, to 5, reflecting low satisfaction. In the data analysis, only patients responding with a 1 or 2 for all of the items within a subscale were classified as "satisfied" for the subscale. To assess the effects of procedure type (implant, pedicle TRAM flap, and free TRAM flap) and timing (immediate versus delayed) on satisfaction and to control for possible confounding effects from other independent variables, multiple logistic regression was employed. In our analysis, odds ratios and associated 95 percent confidence intervals were calculated for each independent variable in the regression. Statistical significance was designated at the p < or = 0.05 level. A total of 212 patients were followed during the period of 1994 to 1997, including 141 immediate and 71 delayed reconstructions. The study population consisted of 49 expander/implant, 102 pedicle TRAM flap, and 61 free TRAM flap reconstruction patients. The analysis showed a significant association between procedure type and patient satisfaction. TRAM flap patients (both free and pedicle) appeared to have significantly greater general and aesthetic satisfaction compared with expander/implant patients (p = 0.03 and 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, pedicle TRAM flap patients were more aesthetically satisfied than those with free TRAM flaps (p = 0.072). The other independent variables of age and procedure timing did not appear to significantly affect either general or aesthetic satisfaction. However, preoperative physical activity was positively correlated with general satisfaction at the p = 0.034 level. The choice of procedure seems to have a significant effect on both aesthetic and general patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction. In this study, autogenous tissue reconstructions produced higher levels of patient aesthetic and general satisfaction compared with implant techniques. Pedicle and free TRAM flap patients do not seem to differ significantly in general satisfaction. However, women receiving pedicle TRAM flaps reported greater aesthetic satisfaction compared with patients undergoing free TRAM flaps. Furthermore, patient age and procedure timing may not have an effect on patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction.     

A comparison of pedicled and free TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction in a single institution.

Several reports concluded that free tissue transfer of the transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flap for breast reconstruction is superior to pedicled transfer of the flap. In an effort to compare the various parameters of both techniques, the authors took advantage of a unique experience at one hospital where one surgeon (D.L.L.) used only the pedicled method and the other (N.J.Y.) used only free tissue transfer. Additionally, the authors compared the findings of the study with the experiences of other surgeons by surveying active members of the American Association of Plastic Surgeons. The records of 119 patients who underwent TRAM flap reconstruction between January of 1988 and July of 1997 were reviewed. Of these, 33 patients received free TRAM flaps, and 86 received pedicled TRAM flaps. To provide an adequate number of patients for statistical analysis, only those with unilateral, single-muscle reconstructions were considered (immediate or delayed). This provided 61 patients in the pedicled flap group and 26 in the free tissue group. Parameters examined included length of operation and of hospitalization, amount of pain medication used, amount of blood lost and received, and complications. A small subset of the patients had hospital records available to compare hospital charges; the comparison of 17 pedicled and 12 free TRAM flaps showed a mean difference of $15,637 (p < 0.001) in favor of the pedicled flap. On the basis of the findings from this study, it seems that the pedicled TRAM flap has significant economic and clinical advantages over the free TRAM flap. There is less need for blood, a shorter operating time and hospital stay, and a need for less pain medication. However, both methods of transfer have indications and contraindications in certain clinical settings. It will always remain the responsibility of the surgeon to evaluate all issues and select a method that is economically responsible and within the abilities of the surgeon, while producing a satisfactory outcome that best serves the patient. The information provided in this report should aid in accomplishing this goal.     

Immediate free TRAM reconstruction in lumpectomy and radiation failure patients

Local recurrence after lumpectomy and radiation therapy indicates failed breast conservation surgery. These patients often proceed to mastectomy and are candidates for autogenous breast reconstruction. Free transverse rectus abdominus muscle (TRAM) reconstruction in these patients is complicated by repeated axillary dissection and the use of irradiated tissue. Complication rates for pedicled TRAMs have been reported at 33 percent when used in irradiated tissue beds. We report our results using the free TRAM for breast reconstruction after lumpectomy and radiation failure. All patients within this study developed a local recurrence after lumpectomy and radiation therapy. All patients had undergone axillary dissection for staging at the time of their lumpectomy. Patient records were reviewed for patient age, total radiation dose, associated risk factors for TRAM failure, operative time, donor vessels used for anastomosis, status of the native thoracodorsal vessels at the time of surgery, and postoperative complications. Over a 7-year period, 16 TRAM patients had undergone previous breast conservation surgery. Of these 16 patients, 14 underwent reconstruction with a planned free TRAM after simple mastectomy. Average operating room time was 7 hours. There were no partial or total flap losses. Complications were seen in 14 percent of the overall group. Overall, we found that the free TRAM provided an excellent aesthetic result with a lower complication rate than previously reported for pedicled TRAM flaps in irradiated beds. The thoracodorsal vessels provided an adequate donor vessel in 93 percent of the cases. The free TRAM provides a superior alternative in immediate reconstruction in patients who have failed breast conservative surgery.     

Delayed-immediate breast reconstruction

In patients with early-stage breast cancer who are scheduled to undergo mastectomy and desire breast reconstruction, the optimal timing of reconstruction depends on whether postmastectomy radiation therapy will be needed. Immediate reconstruction offers the best aesthetic outcomes if postmastectomy radiation therapy is not needed, but if postmastectomy radiation therapy is required, delayed reconstruction is preferable to avoid potential aesthetic and radiation-delivery problems. Unfortunately, the need for postmastectomy radiation therapy cannot be reliably determined until review of the permanent tissue sections. The authors recently implemented a two-stage approach, delayed-immediate breast reconstruction, to optimize reconstruction in patients at risk for requiring postmastectomy radiation therapy when the need for postmastectomy radiation therapy is not known at the time of mastectomy. Stage 1 consists of skin-sparing mastectomy with insertion of a completely filled textured saline tissue expander. After review of permanent sections, patients who did not require post-mastectomy radiation therapy underwent immediate reconstruction (stage 2) and patients who required postmastectomy radiation therapy completed postmastectomy radiation therapy and then underwent standard delayed reconstruction. In this study, the feasibility and outcomes of this approach were reviewed. Fourteen patients were treated with delayed-immediate reconstruction between May of 2002 and June of 2003. Twelve patients had unilateral reconstruction and two patients had bilateral reconstruction, for a total of 16 treated breasts. All patients completed stage 1. Tissue expanders were inserted subpectorally in 15 breasts and subcutaneously in one breast. The mean intraoperative expander fill volume was 475 cc (range, 250 to 750 cc). Three patients required postmastectomy radiation therapy and underwent delayed reconstruction. Eleven patients did not require postmastectomy radiation therapy. Nine patients had 11 breast reconstructions (stage 2), six with free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flaps, one with a superior gluteal artery perforator flap, and four with a latissimus dorsi flap plus an implant. The median interval between stages was 13 days (range, 11 to 22 days). Two patients who did not require postmastectomy radiation therapy have not yet had stage 2 reconstruction, one because she wished to delay reconstruction and the other because she required additional tissue expansion before permanent implant placement. Six complications occurred. The stage 1 complications involved two cases of mastectomy skin necrosis in patients who required post-mastectomy radiation therapy; one patient required removal of the subcutaneously placed expander before postmastectomy radiation therapy and the other patient had a subpectorally placed expander that only required local wound care. The stage 2 complications were a recipient-site seroma in a patient with a latissimus dorsi flap, a recipient-site hematoma in the patient with the superior gluteal artery perforator flap, and two arterial thromboses in patients with TRAM flaps. Both TRAM flaps were salvaged. Delayed-immediate reconstruction is technically feasible and safe in patients with early-stage breast cancer who may require postmastectomy radiation therapy. With this approach, patients who do not require postmastectomy radiation therapy can achieve aesthetic outcomes essentially the same as those with immediate reconstruction, and patients who require postmastectomy radiation therapy can avoid the aesthetic and radiation-delivery problems that can occur after an immediate breast reconstruction.     

Contour abnormalities of the abdomen after breast reconstruction with abdominal flaps: the role of muscle preservation.

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether contour abnormalities of the abdomen after breast reconstruction with abdominal flaps are related to the harvest of the rectus abdominis muscle. Abdominal contour was analyzed in 155 women who had breast reconstruction with abdominal flaps; 108 women had free transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flaps, 37 had pedicled TRAM flaps, and 10 had deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. The reconstruction was unilateral in 110 women and bilateral in 45 women. Three methods of muscle-sparing were used; they are classified as preservation of the lateral muscle, preservation of the medial and lateral muscle, or preservation of the entire muscle. One of these three methods of muscle-sparing was used in 91 women (59 percent) and no muscle-sparing was used in 64 women (41 percent). Postoperative contour abnormalities occurred in 15 woman and included epigastric fullness in five, upper bulge in three, and lower bulge in 10. One woman experienced two abnormalities, one woman experienced three, and no woman developed a hernia. Of these abnormalities, 11 occurred after the free TRAM flap, seven after the pedicled TRAM flap, and none after the DIEP flap. Bilateral reconstruction resulted in 11 abnormalities in nine women, and unilateral reconstruction resulted in seven abnormalities in six women. chi2 analysis of the free and pedicled TRAM flaps demonstrates that muscle-sparing explains the observed differences in upper bulge and upper fullness (p = 0.02), with a trend toward significance for lower bulge (p = 0.06). chi2 analysis of the free TRAM and DIEP flaps does not explain the observed difference in abnormal abdominal contour. Analysis of muscle-sparing and non-muscle-sparing methods demonstrates that the observed difference between the techniques is only explained for a lower bulge after the bilateral free TRAM flap (p = 0.04).     

TRAM flap versus nonautologous breast reconstruction: what do patients really think?

Although there have been many reports of aesthetic outcomes after breast reconstruction, there have been comparatively few studies examining patient satisfaction and related subjective issues. The variables affecting satisfaction are only beginning to be understood, and patient satisfaction issues were explored in a more homogeneous patient population. A questionnaire surveying overall and aesthetic satisfaction, postoperative recuperation time, and symptoms was used to elicit candid patient responses. Fifty-seven patients replied (86 percent response rate), of whom 38 had undergone transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap (pedicled, n = 29; free, n = 9) reconstruction and 19 had undergone nonautologous reconstruction. Although the median patient satisfaction score was higher for the TRAM flap group, this was not statistically significant (p = 0.92). Recuperation was significantly longer for the TRAM flap group, with only 47 percent of patients being able to resume full activities within 2 months after the surgical procedure, compared with 95 percent of the implant group (p = 0.002). Of the TRAM flap-treated patients, 50 percent described some postoperative abdominal weakness, but only 5 percent of all TRAM flap-treated patients said that abdominal weakness was actually a functional problem. Our results suggest that patients may derive equal satisfaction with the two methods of reconstruction. The postoperative recuperation time after TRAM flap reconstruction is significantly longer than that after nonautologous procedures, although the postoperative abdominal weakness after TRAM flap reconstruction is not as significant a clinical problem as previously thought. The patient-derived information on satisfaction should assist both surgeons and patients in matching reconstructive options with patients' expectations and lifestyle.     

Autologous fat graft in nipple reconstruction

Reconstruction of the nipple is the penultimate step in breast reconstruction after mastectomy. A number of reconstructive techniques have been described for nipple reconstruction including skin grafts, composite grafts, and various local flaps. The authors' preferred reconstructive technique is the local C-V or modified star flap. This flap produces an excellent reconstruction, but it is dependent on underlying subcutaneous fat to provide bulk to the reconstructed nipple. In most instances, the subcutaneous tissue is adequate. However, under certain circumstances, the subcutaneous fat may be insufficient to produce a nipple of adequate projection. Two cases of bilateral nipple reconstruction after soft-tissue expansion and implant placement and subsequent nipple reconstruction with local flaps provided inadequate nipple projection. These instances, as well as a retrospective review of reconstructed nipples after mound restoration using a variety of techniques, led the authors to conclude that a more predictable alternative to sustain nipple projection was necessary. The authors identified two broad categories of breast reconstruction patients in whom this new technique would be beneficial. In the first category of patients, breast mounds are reconstructed with tissue expansion and implant insertion, and in the second category, breast mounds are reconstructed by any technique in which the nipple reconstruction subsequently flattens. This article describes the indications, techniques, and experience in 13 patients treated over a 10-month period with fat grafting for nipple reconstruction.     

Bilateral autogenous breast reconstruction using perforator free flaps: a single center's experience

The authors present a single center's experience in bilateral breast reconstruction using perforator free flaps. The aim of this study was to show their indications, surgical technique, and results. A series of 53 patients underwent this procedure between February of 1996 and October of 2002. The surgical procedures were performed on patients with bilateral breast cancer (11 patients), patients with unilateral breast cancer and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (22 patients), patients who had undergone bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (18 patients), a patient with Poland's syndrome, and a patient whose aesthetic breast augmentation had failed. Primary and secondary bilateral breast reconstructions were done in 18 and four patients, respectively. Eighteen patients who had earlier undergone breast reconstruction with implants had a tertiary breast reconstruction. Combined reconstruction (primary with secondary and primary with tertiary reconstruction) was done in 13 patients. Ninety-eight deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps and eight superior gluteal artery perforator flaps were used. The average operative time was 10 hours (range, 8 to 14.5 hours) for the simultaneous bilateral reconstruction. Total flap necrosis occurred in two cases (one deep inferior epigastric perforator flap and one superior gluteal artery perforator flap). Partial flap necrosis was not encountered, and fat necrosis was found in one deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (1 percent). Two pulmonary infections, one deep vein thrombosis, and one cardiac arrhythmia occurred as postoperative complications. The mean hospital stay was 9 days (range, 6 to 20 days). Abdominal bulging was reported in one patient. There were no recurrent disease or cancer manifestations, with an average follow-up of 3.5 years. This series clearly shows that perforator flaps are reliable and useful tools for bilateral breast reconstruction. This technique decreases the donor-site morbidity and offers an excellent aesthetic and long-term outcome and high patient satisfaction.     

Alternative venous outflow vessels in microvascular breast reconstruction

The lack of adequate recipient vessels often complicates microvascular breast reconstruction in patients who have previously undergone mastectomy and irradiation. In addition, significant size mismatch, particularly in the outflow veins, is an important contributor to vessel thrombosis and flap failure. The purpose of this study was to review the authors' experience with alternative venous outflow vessels for microvascular breast reconstruction. In a retrospective analysis of 1278 microvascular breast reconstructions performed over a 10-year period, the authors identified all patients in whom the external jugular or cephalic veins were used as the outflow vessels. Patient demographics, flap choice, the reasons for the use of alternative venous drainage vessels, and the incidence of microsurgical complications were analyzed. The external jugular was used in 23 flaps performed in procedures with 22 patients. The superior gluteal and transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flaps were used in the majority of the cases in which the external jugular vein was used (72 percent gluteal, 20 percent TRAM flap). The need for alternative venous outflow vessels was usually due to a significant vessel size mismatch between the superior gluteal and internal mammary veins (74 percent). For three of the external jugular vein flaps (13 percent), the vein was used for salvage after the primary draining vein thrombosed, and two of three flaps in these cases were eventually salvaged. In three patients, the external jugular vein thrombosed, resulting in two flap losses, while the third was salvaged using the cephalic vein. A total of two flaps were lost in the external jugular vein group. The cephalic vein was used in 11 flaps (TRAM, 64.3 percent; superior gluteal, 35.7 percent) performed in 11 patients. In five patients (54.5 percent), the cephalic vein was used to salvage a flap after the primary draining vein thrombosed; the procedure was successful in four cases. In three patients, the cephalic vein thrombosed, resulting in two flap losses. One patient suffered a thrombosis after the cephalic vein was used to salvage a flap in which the external jugular vein was initially used, leading to flap loss, while a second patient experienced cephalic vein thrombosis on postoperative day 7 while carrying a heavy package. There was only one minor complication attributable to the harvest of the external jugular or cephalic vein (small neck hematoma that was aspirated), and the resultant scars were excellent. The external jugular and cephalic veins are important ancillary veins available for microvascular breast reconstruction. The dissection of these vessels is straightforward, and their use is well tolerated and highly successful.     

A comparison of outcomes using three different methods of breast reconstruction.

In a review of 325 postmastectomy breast reconstructions, the aesthetic quality of the result and the risk of unsuccessful outcome were compared for three techniques: tissue expansion (105 breasts), latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap (47 breasts), and TRAM flap (173 breasts). The aesthetic successes achievable with the three methods were similar, and some excellent results were achieved with each of them. The failure rate after tissue expansion (21 percent) was significantly higher than those observed with the TRAM (3 percent) and latissimus (9 percent) flaps. Tissue expansion also was not as aesthetically successful as other techniques in obese patients. For immediate breast reconstruction, the TRAM flap was the most aesthetically successful technique. Although tissue expansion has advantages and may be the best choice for some patients, methods that used autogenous tissue provided more consistent success.     

The effect of radiation on pedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction: outcomes and implications

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of postreconstruction radiation therapy on patients undergoing pedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Post-TRAM radiation patients were compared with patients who received pre-TRAM radiation and a control TRAM-only group who received no radiation. Overall aesthetic appearance, evidence of symmetry, flap contracture, and hyperpigmentation were assessed by blinded reviewers. A total of 171 pedicled TRAM reconstructions were performed in 150 patients. Total flap complications were seen in 49.5 percent of the control patients, 57.1 percent of pre-TRAM radiation patients, and 50 percent of post-TRAM radiation patients but were not statistically different. The complete flap necrosis rate was 0.6 percent and the partial flap necrosis rate was 7.6 percent, again with no statistical differences among the groups. Donor-site complications occurred in approximately one third of patients in each of the groups. Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolus each occurred once and only in the post-TRAM radiation group. In terms of overall aesthetic outcome, symmetry, and contracture, the control group consistently rated better than the pre-TRAM (p = 0.021, p = 0.03, p = 0.03, respectively) and the post-TRAM (p = 0.0001, p = 0.0001, and p =0.0001, respectively) radiation groups. The control group also had clinically and statistically significant less hyperpigmentation than the post-TRAM radiation group (p = 0.0002). In contrast, irradiated postreconstruction patients had scores, including aesthetic outcome, symmetry, and contracture, worse than those of irradiated prereconstruction patients. When these two groups were compared with each other, except for contracture, no statistical significance, because of a small patient sample, was found. Neither preoperative nor postoperative radiation increased the risk for flap or donor-site complications. In contrast, radiation of any type did affect aesthetic appearance, symmetry, contracture, and hyperpigmentation. The authors recommend that TRAM flap breast reconstruction be postponed in those patients known or expected to receive postmastectomy radiation.     

Effect of smoking on complications in patients undergoing free TRAM flap breast reconstruction

Free pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap breast reconstruction is often advocated as the procedure of choice for autogenous tissue breast reconstruction in high-risk patients, such as smokers. However, whether use of the free TRAM flap is a desirable option for breast reconstruction in smokers is still unclear. All patients undergoing breast reconstruction with free TRAM flaps at our institution between February of 1989 and May of 1998 were reviewed. Patients were classified as smokers, former smokers (patients who had stopped smoking at least 4 weeks before surgery), and nonsmokers. Flap and donor-site complications in the three groups were compared. Information on demographic characteristics, body mass index, and comorbid medical conditions was used to perform multivariate statistical analysis. A total of 936 breast reconstructions with free TRAM flaps were performed in 718 patients (80.9 percent immediate; 23.3 percent bilateral). There were 478 nonsmokers, 150 former smokers, and 90 smokers. Flap complications occurred in 222 (23.7 percent) of 936 flaps. Smokers had a higher incidence of mastectomy flap necrosis than nonsmokers (18.9 percent versus 9.0 percent; p = 0.005). Smokers who underwent immediate reconstruction had a significantly higher incidence of mastectomy skin flap necrosis than did smokers who underwent delayed reconstruction (21.7 percent versus 0 percent; p = 0.039). Donor-site complications occurred in 106 (14.8 percent) of 718 patients. Donor-site complications were more common in smokers than in former smokers (25.6 percent versus 10.0 percent; p = 0.001) or nonsmokers (25.6 percent versus 14.2 percent; p = 0.007). Compared with nonsmokers, smokers had significantly higher rates of abdominal flap necrosis (4.4 percent versus 0.8 percent; p = 0.025) and hernia (6.7 percent versus 2.1 percent; p = 0.016). No significant difference in complication rates was noted between former smokers and nonsmokers. Among smokers, patients with a smoking history of greater than 10 pack-years had a significantly higher overall complication rate compared with patients with a smoking history of 10 or fewer pack-years (55.8 percent versus 23.8 percent; p = 0.049). In summary, free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in smokers was not associated with a significant increase in the rates of vessel thrombosis, flap loss, or fat necrosis compared with rates in nonsmokers. However, smokers were at significantly higher risk for mastectomy skin flap necrosis, abdominal flap necrosis, and hernia compared with nonsmokers. Patients with a smoking history of greater than 10 pack-years were at especially high risk for perioperative complications, suggesting that this should be considered a relative contraindication for free TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Smoking-related complications were significantly reduced when the reconstruction was delayed or when the patient stopped smoking at least 4 weeks before surgery.