Autologous breast reconstruction with the extended latissimus dorsi flap

The extended latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap can provide autogenous tissue replacement of breast volume without an implant. Nevertheless, experience with the extended latissimus dorsi flap for breast reconstruction is relatively limited. In this study, the authors evaluated their experience with the extended latissimus dorsi flap for breast reconstruction to better understand its indications, limitations, complications, and clinical outcomes. All patients who underwent breast reconstruction with extended latissimus dorsi flaps at the authors' institution between January of 1990 and December of 2000 were reviewed. During the study period, 75 extended latissimus dorsi flap breast reconstructions were performed in 67 patients. Bilateral breast reconstructions were performed in eight patients, and 59 patients underwent unilateral breast reconstruction. There were 45 immediate and 30 delayed reconstructions. Mean patient age was 51.5 years. Mean body mass index was 31.8 kg/m2. Flap complications developed in 21 of 75 flaps (28.0 percent), and donor-site complications developed in 29 of 75 donor sites (38.7 percent). Mastectomy skin flap necrosis (17.3 percent) and donor-site seroma (25.3 percent) were found to be the most common complications. There were no flap losses. Patients aged 65 years or older had higher odds of developing flap complications compared with those 45 years or younger (p = 0.03). Patients with size D reconstructed breasts had significantly higher odds of flap complications compared with those with size A or B reconstructed breasts (p = 0.05). Obesity (body mass index greater than or equal to 30 kg/m2) was associated with a 2.15-fold increase in the odds of developing donor-site complications compared with patients with a body mass index less than 30 kg/m2 (p = 0.01). No other studied factors had a significant relationship with flap or donor-site complications. In most patients, the extended latissimus dorsi flap alone, without an implant, can provide good to excellent autologous reconstruction of small to medium sized breasts. In selected patients, larger breasts may be reconstructed with the extended latissimus dorsi flap alone. This flap's main disadvantage is donor-site morbidity with prolonged drainage and risk of seroma. Patients who are obese are at higher risk of developing these donor-site complications. In conclusion, the extended latissimus dorsi flap is a reliable method for total autologous breast reconstruction in most patients and should be considered more often as a primary choice for breast reconstruction.     

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.     

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.     

Trends in unilateral breast reconstruction and management of the contralateral breast: the Emory experience

Recent trends in breast reconstruction have transitioned toward the skin-sparing type of mastectomy and immediate reconstruction using autologous tissue. This study was designed to document trends in the management of patients with unilateral breast cancer and to determine how they influence management of the contralateral breast.All patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction at Emory University Hospitals from January of 1975 to December of 1999 were reviewed. The cohort was stratified by timing of reconstruction (immediate versus delayed), method of reconstruction, and mastectomy type (skin-sparing versus non-skin-sparing). The methods of reconstruction included implant, latissimus dorsi flap, and transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap. Contralateral procedures to achieve symmetry included augmentation, mastopexy, augmentation/mastopexy, and reduction. A total of 1394 patients were evaluated, including 689 delayed and 705 immediate reconstructions. Sixty-seven percent of delayed-reconstruction patients (462 of 689) had a symmetry procedure performed on the opposite breast, compared with 22 percent for the immediate-reconstruction patients (155 of 705) (p 相似文献   

Comparison of immediate and delayed free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation therapy.

Tumor pathologic features and the extent of nodal involvement dictate whether radiation therapy is given after mastectomy for breast cancer. It is generally well accepted that radiation negatively influences the outcome of implant-based breast reconstruction. However, the long-term effect of radiation therapy on the outcome of breast reconstruction with the free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap is still unclear. For patients who need postmastectomy radiation therapy, the optimal timing of TRAM flap reconstruction is controversial. This study compares the outcome of immediate and delayed free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in patients who received postmastectomy radiation therapy.All patients at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center who received postmastectomy radiation therapy and who also underwent free TRAM flap breast reconstruction between January of 1988 and December of 1998 were included in the study. Patients who received radiation therapy before delayed TRAM flap reconstruction were compared with patients who underwent immediate TRAM flap reconstruction before radiation therapy. Early and late complications were compared between the two groups. Early complications included vessel thrombosis, partial or total flap loss, mastectomy skin flap necrosis, and local wound-healing problems, whereas late complications included fat necrosis, volume loss, and flap contracture of free TRAM breast mounds. Late complications were evaluated at least 1 year after the completion of radiation therapy for patients who had delayed reconstruction and at least 1 year after reconstruction for patients who had immediate reconstruction.During the study period, 32 patients had immediate TRAM flap reconstruction before radiation therapy and 70 patients had radiation therapy before TRAM flap reconstruction. Mean follow-up times for the immediate reconstruction and delayed reconstruction groups were 3 and 5 years, respectively. The mean radiation dose was 50 Gy in the immediate reconstruction group and 51 Gy in the delayed reconstruction group.One complete flap loss occurred in the delayed reconstruction group, and no flap loss occurred in the immediate reconstruction group. The incidence of early complications did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the incidence of late complications was significantly higher in the immediate reconstruction group than in the delayed reconstruction group (87.5 percent versus 8.6 percent; p = 0.000). Nine patients (28 percent) in the immediate reconstruction group required an additional flap to correct the distorted contour from flap shrinkage and severe flap contraction.These findings indicate that, in patients who are candidates for free TRAM flap breast reconstruction and need postmastectomy radiation therapy, reconstruction should be delayed until radiation therapy is complete.     

Delay in unipedicled TRAM flap reconstruction of the breast: a review of 76 consecutive cases

Since its introduction in 1982, the transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap has become the standard therapy in autogenous breast reconstruction. A lower rate of partial flap (fat) necrosis is associated with microvascular free-flap transfer compared with the conventional (unipedicled) TRAM flap because of its potentially improved blood supply. A TRAM flap delay before flap transfer has been advocated, especially in a high-risk patient population (obesity, history of cigarette smoking, radiation therapy, or abdominal scar). The authors reviewed a series of 76 consecutive delayed unipedicled TRAM flap breast reconstructions during a 5-year period. Data were analyzed with respect to type of procedure and time of delay, overall outcome, general surgical complications, flap-related (specific) complications (partial or complete flap loss), and patient satisfaction. Seventy-six unilateral breast reconstructions using the unipedicled TRAM flap were performed between 1995 and 2000 in 76 patients (mean age, 47.4 years). Fifty-four flaps were performed as immediate reconstructions, and 22 as secondary procedures. Seventy-two flaps were based on the contralateral pedicle, and four flaps were based on an ipsilateral pedicle. In all cases, a flap delay consisted of ligature of both deep inferior epigastric arteries and veins, accessed from an inferior flap incision down to the fascia, with a mean of 13.9 days before the flap transfer. No acute flap take-back procedure had to be performed. There was no complete flap loss, and breast reconstruction was achieved in all cases. In five cases (6.6 percent), a partial (fat) flap necrosis occurred. Interestingly, the majority of these cases (four of five) were secondary breast reconstructions. In addition, of the five patients who had partial flap necrosis, four had a history of smoking, two received radiation therapy, three received chemotherapy, and three patients were obese (body mass index greater than or equal to 30) or overweight (body mass index greater than or equal to 25). In three cases, an early surgical complication (two wound infections at the flap interface and one at the donor site) occurred. One patient developed a deep vein thrombosis. Five patients developed secondary ventral hernias necessitating repair (6.6 percent). Forty-one patients underwent secondary nipple-areola reconstruction. In 19 patients of this group, a secondary procedure (e.g., scar revision, limited liposuction, and/or excision of contour deformities) was simultaneously performed. A survey of patient satisfaction was performed using a modified SF-36 questionnaire. Fifty-one patients participated (67 percent). The overall satisfaction was very high and 51 patients reported that they would recommend the procedure to others (100 percent). Multiple factors such as patient selection, surgical expertise, and preoperative and postoperative management contribute to the success of any type of autogenous breast reconstruction. However, rare partial and absent complete flap necrosis in the authors' series may be attributable to the flap delay. A low morbidity rate and short hospital stay may become increasingly relevant, with limited structural and financial resources in the future. Therefore, the delayed unipedicled TRAM flap should be regarded as a valuable option in attempted breast reconstruction using autogenous tissue in both a high-risk and the general patient population.     

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.     

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.     

Cost-based comparison between perforator flaps and TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction

More women than ever before are undergoing mastectomies secondary to increased awareness and screening. This increase has also caused a corresponding increase in the number of breast reconstructions requested each year. The increased demand for reconstruction has fueled recent advances in new techniques. Aside from foreign-body reconstruction such as implants, the methods now being used are related to autogenous donations and reconstruction. Transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flaps and perforator flaps are currently being used for autogenous breast reconstruction. This study will compare these two techniques on the basis of cost and length of stay. A retrospective study of 49 patients undergoing a total of 64 perforator flap breast reconstructions at Memorial Medical Center in New Orleans, Louisiana, during the 1997 calendar year was used. There were 59 deep inferior epigastric perforator and five gluteal artery perforator breast reconstructions. All patients underwent some form of breast reconstruction and differed only in respect to whether a mastectomy was performed and whether the reconstruction was unilateral or bilateral. Those patients who underwent a mastectomy with immediate perforator flap reconstruction (n = 26) were then compared with patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate TRAM flap reconstruction (n = 154) at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. The data from the Anderson Study were obtained from material published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in 1996. Comparison of patients was limited to those who underwent mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction because this was the design of the M. D. Anderson study. This approach allowed a cost and length of stay comparison while keeping other variables relatively similar. Patients in the perforator flap series enjoyed a marginally shorter operating time and a much shorter length of stay. On average, the operative time for all perforator flap reconstructions was approximately 2 hours shorter than for all TRAM flaps. As for length of stay, perforator flap patients were discharged, on average, 3 days after the initial reconstruction. In contrast, TRAM flap patients remained in the hospital for an average of approximately 7 days after the initial reconstruction. The overall total, average cost for the perforator flap reconstruction in this study is $9625, whereas the average cost of all TRAM flaps performed in the Anderson study is $18,070.     

Latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap for breast reconstruction: long-term results.

A review was performed on 170 patients who underwent 173 consecutive latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap breast reconstructions between 1978 and 1989. The majority of the patients had modified radical mastectomies, and reconstruction was usually delayed for 3 to 18 months after mastectomy. Acceptable symmetry was obtained in the majority of patients without the need for surgery on the opposite breast. Perioperative and long-term complications are reviewed. Patients were followed for an average of 4.7 years after reconstruction. Ninety-four percent of patients demonstrated little or no change in the reconstructed breast after the first year. This method of reconstruction has met patient expectations with a minimum number of procedures and low morbidity.     

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.     

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.     

A prospective and randomized study, "SVEA," comparing effects of three methods for delayed breast reconstruction on quality of life, patient-defined problem areas of life, and cosmetic result

During the last 30 years, many methods for delayed breast reconstruction have been described. There is a lack of prospective randomized trials comparing reconstruction methods. The present study (SVEA), conducted 1995 to 1996, describes the impacts of three methods: the lateral thoracodorsal flap, the latissimus dorsi flap, and the pedicled transverse rectus abdominis muscle flap (TRAM), on important areas of life, patients' perception of cosmetic result, and quality of life. Questionnaires were completed before randomization and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The preoperative questionnaire concerned the impact of breast loss and expectations on reconstruction. Follow-up questionnaires dealt with satisfaction with cosmetic result and impact on important areas of life. A health-related quality-of-life questionnaire (SF-36) was completed at all points of assessment. A total of 75 of 87 randomized patients underwent breast reconstruction: 16 patients with the lateral thoracodorsal flap, 30 with the latissimus dorsi flap, and 29 with the TRAM flap. The majority were very satisfied with the cosmetic result. Most women reported improvements in important areas of life, and quality of life in terms of "social functioning" and "mental health" increased significantly after the reconstruction. The latissimus dorsi flap and TRAM flap scored significantly higher as compared with the lateral thoracodorsal flap for similarity with the contralateral breast and reduced problems in social situations. No differences between irradiated and nonirradiated patients were found. All methods were considered to produce good cosmetic results and improvements in patient-defined problem areas of life and quality of life. No negative effects were recorded. Thus, irrespective of method, breast reconstruction is a valuable tool for the mastectomized woman to cope with problems in everyday life.     

Technical variations of the bipedicled TRAM flap in unilateral breast reconstruction: effects of conventional versus microsurgical techniques of pedicle transfer on complications rates

In cases of unilateral breast reconstruction with a transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap, poorly perfused tissue, which is normally excised to avoid subsequent fat necrosis, must sometimes be used to achieve adequate breast size and projection. In such cases, incorporation of a second vascular pedicle into the flap design improves perfusion. The authors retrospectively examined their experience with bipedicled TRAM flap-based unilateral breast reconstruction to determine whether the use of microsurgical rather than conventional (nonmicrosurgical) techniques for flap transfer resulted in lower incidences of flap-site fat necrosis and donor-site hernia/bulge. The authors retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction with a bipedicled TRAM or deep inferior epigastric perforator flap between January of 1991 and March of 2001. Group 1 consisted of patients who had undergone flap transfer using a conventional technique for both pedicles; group 2, patients who had flap transfer using a conventional technique for one pedicle and a microsurgical technique for the other; and group 3, patients who had flap transfer using a microsurgical technique for both pedicles. Of the 863 patients identified, 72 (8.3 percent) had undergone reconstruction using a bipedicled flap. There were 43 patients in group 1, 24 patients in group 2, and five patients in group 3. Only one case of total flap loss had occurred (group 1). Partial flap loss occurred in two patients in group 1 (5 percent) and three patients in group 2 (13 percent). Fat necrosis occurred more frequently in groups 1 (23 percent) and 2 (29 percent) than in group 3 (0 percent) (p = 0.5, Fisher's exact test). Similarly, bulge or hernia was more common in groups 1 (12 percent) and 2 (4 percent) than in group 3 (0 percent) (p = 0.6, Fisher's exact test). In this study, patients who received a bipedicled TRAM flap using microsurgical techniques alone (group 3) appeared to have better flap perfusion and less frequent hernia/bulge than did patients who underwent flap transfer using conventional (group 1) or combined techniques (group 2). However, these differences were not statistically significant, and this trend must be verified in a larger study.     

Nipple-areola reconstruction: satisfaction and clinical determinants

After performing a chart review, the authors identified 120 patients who underwent breast cancer-related reconstruction. All charts were evaluated with regard to breast mound reconstruction type, nipple-areola reconstruction type, the interval between breast mound and nipple-areola reconstruction, the number of procedures needed to achieve nipple-areola reconstruction, patient history of radiation therapy, and complications. A questionnaire was then developed and mailed to all of the patients who underwent both breast mound and nipple/areola reconstruction (n = 105) to evaluate their level of satisfaction. Of the 43 patients who returned the questionnaire, 41 completed all portions correctly. The questionnaire evaluated patient satisfaction with breast mound reconstruction; patient satisfaction with nipple-areola reconstruction; what the patient disliked most about the nipple-areola reconstruction; and whether or not the patient would choose to have breast reconstruction again. Several parameters were then tested statistically against the reported patient satisfaction.A review of all patients who underwent breast reconstruction revealed that their breast mound reconstructions were done using either a TRAM flap (59 percent), a latissimus dorsi flap and an implant (19 percent), an expander followed by an implant (9 percent), an implant only (4 percent), or other means (9 percent). The nipple-areola was reconstructed in these patients with either a star flap (36 percent), nipple sharing (10 percent), a keyhole flap (9 percent), a skate flap (9 percent), an S-flap (8 percent), a full-thickness skin graft (6 percent), or by another means (22 percent). The number of procedures needed to achieve nipple-areola reconstruction was either one (in 66 percent of the patients), two (in 32 percent of the patients), or three or more (2 percent of the patients). Eleven percent of the patients experienced the complication of nipple necrosis.Satisfaction with breast mound reconstruction was reported by 81 percent of patients to be excellent/good, by 14 percent of patients to be fair, and by 5 percent of patients to be poor. Reported satisfaction with nipple-areola reconstruction was excellent/good for 64 percent of patients, fair for 22 percent of patients, and poor for 14 percent of patients. The factors patients disliked most about their nipple-areola reconstruction were, in descending order, lack of projection, color match, shape, size, texture, and position. Statistical analysis of the data revealed inferior patient satisfaction when there was a longer interval between breast mound and nipple areola reconstruction (p = 0.003). No significant difference was observed in nipple/areola reconstruction satisfaction ratings when compared with breast mound reconstruction type (p = 0.46), nipple-areola reconstruction type (p = 0.98), and history of radiation therapy (p = 0.23). There was also no significant difference when breast mound reconstruction was compared with technique (p = 0.51) and history of radiation therapy (p = 0.079). Overall, there was a greater satisfaction with breast mound reconstruction than with nipple-areola reconstruction (p = 0.0001).     

The early management of flap necrosis in breast reconstruction

Flap necrosis is a potential complication of any type of breast reconstruction. Of 302 breast reconstructions performed by the author at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, some degree of flap necrosis occurred in 59 (19.5 percent). Small areas of flap necrosis can be managed with simple observation, but secondary healing may not be complete for months. Early and aggressive excision of the ischemic tissue with immediate primary closure often can achieve rapid primary healing. In addition, early revision and reshaping of the breast may, in selected patients, permit achievement of a significantly better final result. This is true not only for TRAM and latissimus dorsi flaps, but also for the mastectomy flap necrosis sometimes encountered in immediate reconstruction with simple implants or tissue expanders.     

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.     

Staged breast reconstruction with saline-filled implants in the irradiated breast: recent trends and therapeutic implications

A retrospective review was performed of one surgeon's experience with 40 consecutive patients who had undergone two-stage saline-filled implant breast reconstruction and radiation during the period from 1990 through 1997. A randomly selected group of 40 other two-stage saline-filled implant breast reconstructions from the same surgeon and time period served as controls. This review was undertaken because of the absence of specific information on the outcome of staged saline implant reconstructions in the radiated breast. Previously published reports on silicone gel implants and radiation have been contradictory. At the same time, the criteria for the use of radiation in the treatment of breast cancer have been expanded and the numbers of reconstruction patients who have been radiated are increasing dramatically. For example, in a 1985 report on immediate breast reconstruction, only 1 of 185 patients over a 6-year period underwent adjuvant radiation therapy, whereas in this review, there were 40 radiated breasts with saline-filled implants, 19 of which received adjuvant radiation therapy during their expansion. The study parameters included patient age, breast cup size, implant size, length of follow-up, number of procedures, coincident flap operations, Baker classification, complications, opposite breast procedures, pathologic stage, indications for and details about the radiation, and outcomes. The use of radiation in this review of reconstructed breasts can logically be divided into four groups: previous lumpectomy and radiation (n = 7), mastectomy and radiation before reconstruction (n = 9), mastectomy and adjuvant radiation during reconstruction/expansion (n = 19), and radiation after reconstruction (n = 5). The largest and most rapidly growing group of patients is of those receiving postmastectomy adjuvant radiation therapy. A total of 47.5 percent (19 of 40) of radiated breasts with saline implants ultimately needed the addition of, or replacement by, a flap. Ten percent of a control group with nonradiated saline implant reconstructions also had flaps, none as replacements. Fifty percent or more of both the radiated and control groups had contralateral surgery. Complications were far more common in the radiated group; for example, there were 32.5 percent capsular contractures compared with none in the control group. The control nonradiated implant-only group and the flap plus implant radiated group did well cosmetically. The radiated implant-only group was judged the worst. The increasing use of radiation after mastectomy has important implications for breast reconstruction. The possibility for radiation should be thoroughly investigated and anticipated preoperatively before immediate breast reconstruction. Patients with invasive disease, particularly with large tumors or palpable axillary lymph nodes, are especially likely to be encouraged to undergo postmastectomy radiation therapy. The indications for adjuvant radiation therapy have included four or more positive axillary lymph nodes, tumors 4 cm (or more) in diameter, and tumors at or near the margin of resection. More recently, some centers are recommending adjuvant radiation therapy for patients with as few as one positive lymph node or even in situ carcinoma close to the resection margin. The use of latissimus dorsi flaps after radiation has proven to be an excellent solution to postradiation tissue contracture, which can occur during breast expander reconstruction. The use of the latissimus flap electively with skin-sparing mastectomy preradiation is probably unwise, unless postmastectomy radiation is unlikely. Skin-sparing mastectomy with a latissimus flap thus should be preserved for patients unlikely to undergo adjuvant radiation therapy. Purely autologous reconstruction such as a TRAM flap is another option for these patients, either before or after radiation therapy.     

Effect of obesity on flap and donor-site complications in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap breast reconstruction

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of obesity on flap and donor-site complications in patients undergoing free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap breast reconstruction. All patients undergoing breast reconstruction with free TRAM flaps at our institution from February 1, 1989, through May 31, 1998, were reviewed. Patients were divided into three groups based on their body mass index: normal (body mass index <25), overweight (body mass index 25 to 29), obese (body mass index > or =30). Flap and donor-site complications in the three groups were compared. A total of 936 breast reconstructions with free TRAM flaps were performed in 718 patients. There were 442 (61.6 percent) normal-weight, 212 (29.5 percent) overweight, and 64 (8.9 percent) obese patients. Flap complications occurred in 222 of 936 flaps (23.7 percent). Compared with normal-weight patients, obese patients had a significantly higher rate of overall flap complications (39.1 versus 20.4 percent; p = 0.001), total flap loss (3.2 versus 0 percent; p = 0.001), flap seroma (10.9 versus 3.2 percent; p = 0.004), and mastectomy flap necrosis (21.9 versus 6.6 percent; p = 0.001). Similarly, overweight patients had a significantly higher rate of overall flap complications (27.8 versus 20.4 percent; p = 0.033), total flap loss (1.9 versus 0 percent p = 0.004), flap hematoma (0 versus 3.2 percent; p = 0.007), and mastectomy flap necrosis (15.1 versus 6.6 percent; p = 0.001) compared with normal-weight patients. Donor-site complications occurred in 106 of 718 patients (14.8 percent). Compared with normal-weight patients, obese patients had a significantly higher rate of overall donor-site complications (23.4 versus 11.1 percent; p = 0.005), infection (4.7 versus 0.5 percent; p = 0.016), seroma (9.4 versus 0.9 percent; p <0.001), and hernia (6.3 versus 1.6 percent; p = 0.039). Similarly, overweight patients had a significantly higher rate of overall donor-site complications (19.8 versus 11.1 percent; p = 0.003), infection (2.4 versus 0.5 percent; p = 0.039), bulge (5.2 versus 1.8 percent; p = 0.016), and hernia (4.3 versus 1.6 percent; p = 0.039) compared with normal-weight patients. There were no significant differences in age distribution, smoking history, or comorbid conditions among the three groups of patients. Obese patients, however, had a significantly higher incidence of preoperative radiotherapy and preoperative chemotherapy than did patients in the other two groups. A total of 23.4 percent of obese patients had preoperative radiation therapy compared with 12.3 percent of overweight patients and 12.4 percent of normal-weight patients; 34.4 percent of obese patients had preoperative chemotherapy compared with 24.5 percent of overweight patients and 17.7 percent of normal-weight patients. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine the risk factors for flap and donor-site complications while simultaneously controlling for potential confounding factors, including the incidence of preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In summary, obese and overweight patients undergoing breast reconstruction with free TRAM flaps had significantly higher total flap loss, flap hematoma, flap seroma, mastectomy skin flap necrosis, donor-site infection, donor-site seroma, and hernia compared with normal-weight patients. There were no significant differences in the rate of partial flap loss, vessel thrombosis, fat necrosis, abdominal flap necrosis, or umbilical necrosis between any of the groups. The majority of overweight and even obese patients who undertake breast reconstruction with free TRAM flaps complete the reconstruction successfully. Both such patients and surgeons, however, must clearly understand that the risk of failure and complications is higher than in normal-weight patients. Patients who are morbidly obese are at very high risk of failure and complications and should avoid any type of TRAM flap breast reconstruction.