The power flap: streamlining the PMMC for consistent surgical outcomes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20253454Keywords:
Head and neck reconstruction, Nipple-areola complex, Necrosis, Pectoralis major musculocutaneous flapAbstract
Background: The gold standard for reconstructive surgery is free flap reconstruction. Nevertheless, in developing nations, the high volume of cases, along with infrastructural and resource limitations, has led to the continued use of pectoralis major musculocutaneous flap (PMMC). This article seeks to share our experiences with the harvesting of PMMC flap and the associated outcomes.
Methods: A total of 45 patients were retrospectively assessed for reconstruction over a period of 5 years (January 2019 to February 2024). Of these, 30 patients underwent reconstruction using the PMMC flap following a stream lined protocol. The outcomes of the reconstruction, categorized as either successful or unsuccessful, along with any complications that arose, were thoroughly evaluated. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 26.0.and presented a numbers and percentages.
Results: The largest proportion of patients fell within the 41–60 age range, accounting for 63.33%. The buccal mucosa was identified as the most frequent location for primary lesions, affecting 21 patients (70.00%). Among the 30 patients who received PMMC flap reconstruction following a standardized technique making it a streamlined protocol, there were no instances of complete flap loss, resulting in a success rate of 100%. However, one case did report necrosis of the breast mound where standardization was not considered.
Conclusions: Based on our experience, PMMC flap remains a practical choice for reconstruction, particularly in settings with limited resources. Present approach was standardized by clearly defining the steps of the flap elevation by making it thin and less bulky, increasing its reach, minimizing the donor site morbidities and reducing the donor site deformities. With this stream lined protocol even a junior most plastic surgeon can perform the surgery confidently without facing significant complexity.
Metrics
References
Petruzzelli GJ, Brockenbrough JM, Vandevender D, Creech SD. The influence of reconstructive modality on cost of care in head and neck oncologic surgery. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002;128(12):1377-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.128.12.1377
McCraw JB, Dibbell DG, Carraway JH. Clinical definition of independent myocutaneous vascular territories. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1977;60(3):341-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-197709000-00003
Ariyan S. The pectoralis major myocutaneous flap. A versatile flap for reconstruction in the head and neck. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1979;63(1):73-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-197901000-00012
Castelli ML, Pecorari G, Succo G, Bena A, Andreis M, Sartoris A. Pectoralis major myocutaneous flap: analysis of complications in difficult patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2001;258(10):542-5.
Coruh A. Pectoralis major musculocutaneous flap with nipple-areola complex in head and neck reconstruction: preliminary results of a new modified method. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56(4):413-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sap.0000202889.09833.34
Milenović A, Virag M, Uglesić V, Aljinović-Ratković N. The pectoralis major flap in head and neck reconstruction: first 500 patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2006;34(6):340-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2006.04.001
Cunha-Gomes D, Choudhari C, Kavarana NM. Vascular compromise of the pectoralis major musculocutaneous flap in head and neck reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2003;51(5):450-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sap.0000095649.87358.b7
Baek SM, Lawson W, Biller HF. An analysis of 133 pectoralis major myocutaneous flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1982;69(3):460-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-198203000-00010
El-Marakby HH. The reliability of pectoralis major myocutaneous flap in head and neck reconstruction. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2006;18(1):41-50.
Liu R, Gullane P, Brown D, Irish J. Pectoralis major myocutaneous pedicled flap in head and neck reconstruction: retrospective review of indications and results in 244 consecutive cases at the Toronto General Hospital. J Otolaryngol. 2001;30(1):34-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2310/7070.2001.21011
Corduff N, Taylor GI. Subglandular breast reduction: the evolution of a minimal scar approach to breast reduction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113(1):175-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PRS.0000095945.27892.48
Castelli ML, Pecorari G, Succo G, Bena A, Andreis M, Sartoris A. Pectoralis major myocutaneous flap: analysis of complications in difficult patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2001;258(10):542-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004050100389
Würinger E, Mader N, Posch E, Holle J. Nerve and vessel supplying ligamentous suspension of the mammary gland. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;101(6):1486-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199805000-00009
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
