Study of options and procedures in reconstruction of post mastectomy breast defects in a regional cancer centre

Lakshmi Palukuri; Srinath Kathi; Sanujit Pawde; Shreedharala Srinivas; D. Madhulika

doi:10.18203/2349-2902.isj20232329

Authors

Lakshmi Palukuri Department of Plastic Surgery, Osmania Medical College and Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2387-9594
Srinath Kathi Department of Plastic Surgery, Osmania Medical College and Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9967-6602
Sanujit Pawde Department of Plastic Surgery, Osmania Medical College and Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6453-7670
Shreedharala Srinivas Department of Neurosurgery, Osmania Medical College and Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1986-0303
D. Madhulika Department of Plastic Surgery, Osmania Medical College and Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4114-840X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20232329

Keywords:

Breast cancer, Flaps, Mastectomy, Reconstruction, Thoracoabdominal

Abstract

Background: Post mastectomy autologous breast reconstruction is challenging and involves restoring the patients lost structure and prepping the patient for adjuvant therapy and also psychosocial benefits that comes with early breast reconstruction. We analysed latissimus dorsi flap, transverse rectus abdomenis flap, deep inferior epigastric perforator flap and thoracoabdominal flap. Aim was to reconstruct post mastectomy defect using various methods, to enable the patient to receive early adjuvant therapy. Objectives were to study the various procedures used for post mastectomy defect autologous breast reconstruction. To evaluate the reliability of various flaps used. To evaluate the complications of flaps and their management. To assess the advantages and disadvantages of each flap.

Methods: 42 post mastectomy defect patients reconstructed with 4 flaps over 24 months, included in the study and results analysed.

Results: In 42 cases, latissimus dorsi flap was done in 11 cases, transverse rectus abdominis flap was done in 6 cases, deep inferior epigastric perforator flap was done in 3 cases and thoracoabdominal flap was done in 22 cases. Total flap loss in 1 case and partial flap loss in 6 cases was seen.

Conclusions: Immediate autologous breast reconstruction is helpful in making the patient ready for upcoming adjuvant therapy along with psychosocial benefits. We have analysed 4 different types of flaps and compared their advantages and disadvantages. We found that thoracoabdominal flap is a good option of immediate coverage in low socioeconomic class patients and ones with terminal disease.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Risal Djohan MD, Gage E, Bernard S. Breast reconstruction options following mastectomy. Cleveland Clin J Med. 2008;75:S17.

Patani N, Devalia H, Anderson A, Mokbel K. Oncological safety and patient satisfaction with skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. Surg Oncol. 2008;17(2):97-105.

Heimes AS, Stewen K, Hasenburg A. Psychosocial aspects of immediate versus delayed breast reconstruction. Breast Care. 2017;12(6):374-7.

Yoon AP, Qi J, Brown DL, Kim HM, Hamill JB, Erdmann-Sager J, et al. Outcomes of immediate versus delayed breast reconstruction: results of a multicenter prospective study. Breast. 2018;37:72-9.

Sanati-Mehrizy P, Massenburg BB, Rozehnal JM, Gupta N, Rosa JH, Ingargiola MJ, et al. A comparison of postoperative outcomes in immediate versus delayed reconstruction after mastectomy. Eplasty. 2015;30(15)

Elkowitz A, Colen S, Slavin S, Seibert J, Weinstein M, Shaw W. Various methods of breast reconstruction after mastectomy: an economic comparison. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;92(1):77-83.

Zhong T, Hu J, Bagher S, Vo A, O’Neill AC, Butler K, et al. A comparison of psychological response, body image, sexuality, and quality of life between immediate and delayed autologous tissue breast reconstruction: a prospective long-term outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(4):772-80.

Chevray PM. Timing of breast reconstruction: immediate versus delayed. Cancer J. 2008;14(4):223-9.

Kronowitz SJ, Kuerer HM. Advances and surgical decision-making for breast reconstruction. Cancer. 2006;107(5):893-907.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer. Version 2.2016. 2016. Available at: www.nccn.org. Accessed on 14 June 2022.

Schain WS, Wellisch DK, Pasnau RO, Landsverk J. The sooner the better: a study of psychological factors in women undergoing immediate versus delayed breast reconstruction. Am J Psychiatr. 1985;142(1):40-6.

Nissen MJ, Swenson KK, Ritz LJ, Farrell JB, Sladek ML, Lally RM. Quality of life after breast carcinoma surgery: a comparison of three surgical procedures. Cancer. 2001;91(7):1238-46.

Rowland JH, Desmond KA, Meyerowitz BE, Belin TR, Wyatt GE, Ganz PA. Role of breast reconstructive surgery in physical and emotional outcomes among breast cancer survivors. J Nat Cancer Inst. 2000;92(17):1422-9.

Metcalfe KA, Semple J, Quan ML, Vadaparampil ST, Holloway C, Brown M, et al. Changes in psychosocial functioning 1 year after mastectomy alone, delayed breast reconstruction, or immediate breast reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(1):233-41

Potter S, Brigic A, Whiting PF, Cawthorn SJ, Avery KN, Donovan JL, et al. Reporting clinical outcomes of breast reconstruction: a systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103(1):31-46.

Spear SL, Newman MK, Bedford MS, Schwartz KA, Cohen M, Schwartz JS. A retrospective analysis of outcomes using three common methods for immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(2):340-7.

Ekin Y, Günüşen İ, Özdemir ÖY, Tiftikçioğlu YÖ. Effect of coagulation status and co-morbidity on flap success and complications in patients with reconstructed free flap. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2019;47(2):98-106.

Rosado P, Cheng HT, Wu CM, Wei FC. Influence of diabetes mellitus on postoperative complications and failure in head and neck free flap reconstruction: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Head Neck. 2015;37(4):615-8.

Bennett KG, Qi J, Kim HM, Hamill JB, Pusic AL, Wilkins EG. Comparison of 2-year complication rates among common techniques for postmastectomy breast reconstruction. JAMA Surg. 2018;153(10):901-8.

Naoum GE, Salama L, Niemierko A, Vieira BL, Belkacemi Y, Colwell AS, et al. Single stage direct-to-implant breast reconstruction has lower complication rates than tissue expander and implant and comparable rates to autologous reconstruction in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020;106(3):514-24.

Papassotiropoulos B, Güth U, Chiesa F, Rageth C, Amann E, Baege A, et al. Prospective evaluation of residual breast tissue after skin-or nipple-sparing mastectomy: results of the SKINI-trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:1254-62.

Santosa KB, Chen X, Qi J, Ballard TN, Kim HM, Hamill JB, et al. Post-mastectomy radiation therapy (pmrt) and two-staged implant-based breast reconstruction: is there a better time to radiate? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(4):761.

Ho AY, Hu ZI, Mehrara BJ, Wilkins EG. Radiotherapy in the setting of breast reconstruction: types, techniques, and timing. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18:e742e53.

Agarwal S, Kidwell KM, Farberg A, Kozlow JH, Chung KC, Momoh AO. Immediate reconstruction of the radiated breast: recent trends contrary to traditional standards. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:2551-9.

Cooke AL, Diaz-Abele J, Hayakawa T, Buchel E, Dalke K, Lambert P. Radiation therapy versus no radiation therapy to the neo-breast following skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate autologous free flap reconstruction for breast cancer: patient-reported and surgical outcomes at 1 year- a Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium (MROC) substudy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;99(1):165-72.

Davis C, Boyd C, de Acosta Andino DA, Kumbla PA, Sanchez RJ, Kurapati S, et al. Dermal autografts in breast reconstruction: a review of past and current trends. Ann Plast Surg. 2020;84(5):618-22.

Lynch MP, Chung MT, Rinker BD. Dermal autografts as a substitute for acellular dermal matrices (ADM) in tissue expander breast reconstruction: a prospective comparative study. J Plast Reconstr Aesth Surg. 2013;66:1534e42.

Winters ZE, Haviland J, Balta V, Benson J, Reece-Smith A, Betambeau N, et al. Integration of patient-reported outcome measures with key clinical outcomes after immediate latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction and adjuvant treatment. Br J Surg 2013;100(2):240-51.

Yueh JH, Slavin SA, Adesiyun T, Nyame TT, Gautam S, Morris DJ, et al. Patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparative evaluation of DIEP, TRAM, latissimus flap, and implant techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125(6):1585-95.