Search

Acute pain after mastectomy is increased with concurrent breast reconstruction. One postulated advantage of prepectoral breast reconstruction is less postoperative pain; however, no comparisons to partial submuscular reconstruction have been made to date. Here, we examined the postoperative pain experienced between patients with prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomy.We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders from 2012 to 2019 by a single plastic surgeon. Patient demographics, surgical details, and anesthetic techniques were evaluated, and our primary outcome compared postoperative opioid usage between prepectoral and subpectoral reconstructions. Our secondary outcome compared pain scores between techniques.A total of 211 subpectoral and 117 prepectoral reconstruction patients were included for analysis. Patients with subpectoral reconstructions had higher postoperative opioid usage (80.0 vs 45.0 oral morphine equivalents, P0.001). Subpectoral patients also recorded higher maximum pain scores compared with prepectoral reconstructions while admitted (7 of 10 vs 5 of 10, P0.004). Multivariable linear regression suggests that mastectomy type and subpectoral reconstruction were significant contributors to postoperative opioid use (P0.05).Prepectoral breast reconstruction was associated with less postoperative opioid consumption and lower postoperative pain scores as compared with subpectoral reconstruction, when controlling for other surgical and anesthesia factors. Future randomized controlled trials are warranted to study how postoperative pain and chronic pain are influenced by the location of prosthesis placement in implant-based postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomy is a more commonly performed technique in recent years due to its numerous advantages over subpectoral breast reconstruction. This study reviews the current state of clinical outcomes for patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) after prepectoral breast reconstruction. A comprehensive search of the literature was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify all relevant studies. Outcome measures included demographics, mean follow-up, and complication measures. Three studies for a total of 175 breasts were identified. Average age was 49.3 years and BMI was 27.7 kg/m(2). Mean follow up was 18.1 months. A total of 3 (1.7%) hematomas and 4 (2%) seromas were reported. Surgical site infection was the most common complication reported with an overall reported 32 breasts with infections (18%). A total of 9 (5.1%) cases of wound dehiscence were reported. Mastectomy flap necrosis was found in 10 (5.7%) breasts. A total of 22 (12.6%) tissue expanders or implants required explantation. The review of the literature suggests that prepectoral breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrices in the setting of post mastectomy radiation therapy is a safe and successful surgical option resulting in excellent clinical outcomes. Furthermore, there may be a reduction of capsular contracture and implant migration in this setting, relative to traditional submuscular techniques with PMRT.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has become a popular method of postmastectomy breast reconstruction due to its numerous benefits in properly selected patients. Prepectoral reconstruction, as compared with retropectoral position, offers the advantage of leaving the pectoralis muscle undisturbed and in its original anatomic position, resulting in significantly decreased acute and chronic pain, improved upper extremity strength and range of motion, and avoidance of animation deformity. The use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) allows for precise control of the breast pocket, resulting in aesthetic outcomes and high patient satisfaction. ADMs have the added benefit of reducing capsular contracture, especially in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy. Although prepectoral breast reconstruction is effective, the breast implant is placed closer to the skin flap with less vascularized soft tissue coverage. Therefore, optimizing outcomes in prepectoral breast reconstruction requires careful patient selection, intraoperative mastectomy flap evaluation, and perioperative surgical algorithms specific to prepectoral reconstruction.

Background Reconstruction of intrapelvic soft tissue defects traditionally relies on regional pedicled myocutaneous flaps. However, there remain situations in which local options are unavailable. We review our experience treating intrapelvic defects with the anterolateral thigh (ALT) microvascular free flap. Methods A retrospective, institutional review was conducted from 2014 to 2018 of patients undergoing microvascular ALT flap reconstruction of intrapelvic defects. Four patients were identified in this cohort out of 92 total pelvic reconstruction cases. Results All patients underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer treatment. In the two male patients, pelvic abscesses and bladder leak necessitated soft tissue reconstruction after radiation and APR. In both, regional tissue options were unavailable, and a buried ALT free flap was used for soft tissue reconstruction. Both female patients developed rectovaginal fistulas secondary to their tumor burden, necessitating posterior vaginal wall resections. Prior surgical scars and ostomies made abdominal wall tissue unavailable; thus, free ALTs were used to eliminate intrapelvic dead space and reconstruct the posterior vaginal wall. In all cases, recipient vessels were the deep inferior epigastric artery and vein. Flap survival was 100%. Conclusions Pelvic reconstruction has traditionally been addressed with local/regional pedicled flaps. In cases where these are unavailable, the free ALT flap is a versatile option when buried for intrapelvic reconstruction or posterior vaginal wall lining. We also propose updating Cordeiro et al.'s classic vaginal defect reconstruction algorithm to include the free ALT flap for type IB cases in which the rectus abdominis is unavailable.

Nipple-sparing mastectomy has been associated with superior aesthetic outcomes and oncologic safety. However, traditional contraindications, such as breast ptosis/macromastia, have excluded a large number of patients. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a staged approach would expand the indications for nipple-areolar complex preservation and permit greater control over nipple-areolar complex position and skin envelope following autologous reconstruction.A retrospective analysis was conducted of female patients with a diagnosis of breast cancer or BRCA mutation with grade 2 or 3 ptosis and/or macromastia who underwent bilateral (oncoplastic) reduction/mastopexy (stage 1) followed by bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with free abdominal flaps (stage 2). The authors were specifically interested in the incidence of mastectomy skin necrosis and nipple-areolar complex necrosis and malposition following stage 2.Sixty-one patients with a mean age of 45.1 years (range, 28 to 62 years) and mean body mass index of 32.6 kg/m (range, 23.4 to 49.0 kg/m) underwent reconstruction with 122 flaps. The mean interval between stage 1 and 2 was 16.9 weeks (range, 3 to 31 weeks). Clear margins were obtained in all cases of invasive cancer and in situ disease following stage 1. Complications following stage 2 included partial nipple-areolar complex necrosis (n = 5, 8.2 percent), complete nipple-areolar complex necrosis (n = 4, 6.6 percent), nipple-areolar complex malposition (n = 1, 1.6 percent), and mastectomy skin necrosis (n = 4, 6.6 percent). No flap loss was noted in this series.Patients with moderate to severe breast ptosis and/or macromastia who wish to undergo mastectomy with reconstruction can be offered nipple-sparing approaches safely if a staged algorithm is implemented.Therapeutic, IV.

Background Prepectoral breast reconstruction following mastectomy has become a more widely performed technique in recent years because of its numerous benefits for women. These include full pectoralis muscle preservation, reduced loss of strength, reduced pain, and elimination of animation deformity. As with any breast reconstruction technique, widespread adoption is dependent on a low morbidity profile in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy, as this adjuvant therapy is routine in breast cancer treatment. The authors assess the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy following prepectoral breast reconstruction, and compare these to outcomes of patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy with submuscular reconstruction. Methods A single surgeon's experience with immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction, followed by postmastectomy radiation therapy, from 2015 to 2017 was reviewed. Patient demographics and incidence of complications during the tissue expander stage were assessed. In addition, the morbidity profile of these patients was compared to that of patients undergoing submuscular/dual-plane reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation therapy over the same period. Results Over 3 years, 175 breasts underwent immediate prepectoral reconstruction, and 236 breasts underwent immediate submuscular/dual-plane reconstruction. Overall rates of adjuvant radiation therapy (postmastectomy radiation therapy) were similar between prepectoral [26 breasts (14.9 percent)] and submuscular [31 breasts (13.1 percent)] (p = 0.6180) reconstruction. There were no significant differences in complication rates between the two reconstructive cohorts, in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy, including rates of explantation (15.4 percent versus 19.3 percent; p = 0.695). Conclusions Prepectoral breast reconstruction is a safe and effective option in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy. The morbidity profile is similar to that encountered with submuscular reconstruction in this setting. Clinical question/level of evidence Therapeutic, III.

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate which mesh type yields lower recurrence and complication rates after ventral hernia repair. Summary background data More than 400,000 ventral hernia repairs are performed annually in the United States. Although the most effective method for repairing ventral hernias involves using mesh, whether to use biologic mesh versus synthetic mesh is controversial. Methods Single-blind, randomized, controlled, pragmatic clinical trial conducted from March 2014 through October 2018; 165 patients enrolled with an average follow up of 26 months. Patients were randomized 1:1 to have their ventral hernias repaired using either a biologic (porcine) or synthetic (polypropylene) mesh. The primary study outcome measure was hernia recurrence at 2 years. Results A total of 165 patients (68 men), mean age 55 years, were included in the study with a mean follow-up of 26 months. An intention-to-treat analysis noted that hernias recurred in 25 patients (39.7%) assigned to biologic mesh and in 14 patients (21.9%) assigned to synthetic mesh (P = 0.035) at 2 years. Subgroup analysis identified an increased rate of hernia recurrence in the biologic versus the synthetic mesh group under contaminated wound conditions (50.0% vs 5.9%; P for interaction = 0.041). Postoperative complication rates were similar for the 2 mesh types. Conclusions The risk of hernia recurrence was significantly higher for patients undergoing ventral hernia repair with biologic mesh compared to synthetic mesh, with similar rates of postoperative complications. These data indicate that the use of synthetic mesh over biologic mesh to repair ventral hernias is effective and can be endorsed, including under contaminated wound conditions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02041494.

BACKGROUND Immediate tissue expander placement remains a preferred method for breast reconstruction after mastectomy. The use of prophylactic postoperative antibiotic administration is thought to reduce rates of surgical site infection and reconstructive failure, but has not been studied in patients undergoing reconstruction in the prepectoral plane. METHODS We retrospectively identified all patients undergoing immediate prepectoral tissue expander placement after mastectomy by a single plastic surgeon from 2015 to 2018. We identified 2 cohorts of patients: one group that received prophylactic antibiotics at the time of discharge and one group that did not. We collected treatment and outcomes data to compare rates of postoperative complications between cohorts. RESULTS We identified 69 patients with 115 breasts who received discharge antibiotics and 63 patients with 106 breasts who did not. The antibiotic cohort had significantly lower rates of tissue expander loss (4.3% vs 17.0%, P = 0.003), unplanned operation (10.4% vs 24.5%, P = 0.007), and infection (7.0% vs 24.5, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The use of prophylactic postoperative antibiotics in prepectoral breast reconstruction is associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative complications. Further randomized controlled studies are warranted to explore the effect of antibiotic therapy on outcomes and to determine what the optimal duration of antibiotic therapy may be.

BACKGROUND Animation deformity is an undesirable outcome of subpectoral breast reconstruction that results in abnormal breast contraction with activity, breast pain, and increased implant visibility. Surgical correction requires implant removal and conversion of the reconstruction to a prepectoral plane. The authors present their institutional experience with their preferred surgical technique to treat this challenging problem and outline solutions for increased success in these patients. METHODS A retrospective review was performed of all patients undergoing conversion of their subpectoral breast reconstruction to a prepectoral plane at the authors' institution. Patient demographics and surgical details were analyzed, and postoperative outcomes and morbidity were assessed. The effects of changing operative strategies on enhanced success are also reported. RESULTS A total of 80 breast conversions were performed over a 2.5-year period. All patients demonstrated resolution of animation deformity at a mean follow-up of 15.2 months. Two reconstructions (2.5 percent) required an unplanned return to the operating room, and 11 reconstructions (13.8 percent) were treated for infection. Preconversion fat grafting and the use of acellular dermal matrix were both associated with a reduced incidence of postoperative asymmetry and capsular contracture (p < 0.05). There were no reconstructive failures associated with conversion to a prepectoral pocket. CONCLUSIONS Treatment of animation deformity in the reconstructed patient can be safely performed by surgical conversion to a prepectoral plane. The use of acellular dermal matrix, and preconversion fat grafting, in appropriate patients can improve results. The authors promote this operative algorithm for all reconstructive patients experiencing symptomatic animation deformity with subpectoral breast reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, IV.

Breast reconstruction is frequently offered to women undergoing either mastectomy or breast conservation, given its safe nature and ability to achieve highly aesthetic reconstructive outcomes. Many options are now available for patients undergoing mastectomy, based on whether they are looking to undergo prosthetic or autologous reconstruction. Breast implants are safe and offer flexibility of size and projection, together with a shorter recovery, while autologous flaps allow women to avoid prosthetic devices and utilize skin and fat from elsewhere on the body to replace breast tissue. The increasing frequency of nipple sparing mastectomy, autologous fat grafting, use of acellular dermal matrices, and pre-pectoral prosthetic reconstruction have further enhanced aesthetic outcomes in breast reconstruction. Additionally, outcomes from breast conservation have been enhanced by immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction at the time of lumpectomy that reduces risks of contour deformities and breast asymmetry while maintaining excellent aesthetic outcomes that are oncologically safe.

The term mastectomy refers to surgical extirpation of all breast parenchymal tissue, and any procedure that intentionally aims to preserve a proportion of breast tissue is otherwise known as breast conserving surgery. Until the latter quarter of the twentieth century, breast cancer surgery involved mastectomy only and was dominated by two surgical procedures – the radical and modified radical mastectomy. The operation of radical mastectomy is attributed to William Stewart Halsted and was presaged on the assumption that breast cancer arose from a single focus within the breast and spread contiguously and centrifugally over time with progressive involvement of adjacent tissue and the lymphatic system.

Background Postmastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS) is characterized by neuropathic pain from direct nerve injury during oncologic breast surgery causing chronic pain, often leading to chronic opioid dependence and long-term disability. To our knowledge, this study represents the first meta-analysis that defines the incidence of PMPS in patients undergoing mastectomy, with and without breast reconstruction. Methods The Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases were queried. A total of 166 citations from 1991 to 2017 were reviewed to identify 22 unique manuscripts. Inclusion criteria required: (i) minimum 3-month follow-up, (ii) pain in breast, (iii) pain after mastectomy, (iv) documentation of any reconstruction, and (v) minimum of level three evidence. Comprehensive Meta- Analysis Software and Microsoft Excel were used for statistical calculations. Results Sixteen manuscripts described the prevalence of postmastectomy pain and 11 described the prevalence of postreconstruction pain (5 had data for both). Study population size ranged from 32 to 1165 patients. All studies were classified as level 2 or level 3 evidence. The mean prevalence of pain after mastectomy alone using a random-effects model is 35.6% (30.3%-41.3%). Mean prevalence of pain after mastectomy with reconstruction using the random-effects model is 32.8% (24.4% - 42.5%). Analysis of variance analysis showed no significant difference between prevalence of chronic pain after mastectomy alone versus mastectomy and reconstruction (P = 0.88). Conclusions Our meta-analysis establishes that postmastectomy reconstruction does not increase the incidence of PMPS. However, because this neuropathic pain often persists after reconstructive surgery, it is incumbent on the plastic surgeon to counsel patients on PMPS. Moving forward, prospective studies on the effects of reconstruction type and adjunct procedures are warranted.

Breast reconstruction is offered to women undergoing mastectomy or breast conservation, given its safe nature and highly aesthetic reconstructive outcomes. Breast implants are safe, offer flexibility of sizes and projections, and shorter recovery. Autologous flaps allow women to avoid prosthetic devices, using skin and fat to replace breast tissue. The increasing frequency of nipple-sparing mastectomy, autologous fat grafting, use of acellular dermal matrices, and prepectoral prosthetic reconstruction have enhanced aesthetic outcomes. Breast conservation outcomes have been enhanced by immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction to reduce the risks of contour deformities and breast asymmetry, and maintain excellent, oncologically safe, aesthetic outcomes.

Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast grows in a diffuse pattern, making complete surgical excision difficult. This results in high rates of positive margins and low rates of successful breast-conserving surgery. We hypothesized that utilizing oncoplastic surgical techniques and selective shave margins would be associated with lower positive margin rates and increased breast conservation in women with ILC. We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis in a large cohort of prospectively collected ILC cases who received surgical treatment at the University of California, San Francisco, between 1992 and 2017. We identified all patients with histologically proven, unilateral or bilateral, stage 1–3 ILC. The primary outcome was positive margin rates, defined as no ink on tumor. We identified 365 tumors in 358 women, with an average age of 61 years, who underwent breast-conserving surgery, and found that the use of oncoplastic techniques (odds ratio [OR] 0.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21–0.79, p = 0.008) and the selective use of shave margins (OR 0.393, 95% CI 0.22–0.7, p = 0.002) were significantly associated with lower positive margin rates, when adjusted for tumor size and multifocality. The success rate for breast-conservation surgery was 75%, with a 25% conversion rate to mastectomy. Surgeons should consider routine use of oncoplastic techniques and shave margins when performing breast-conservation surgery for women with ILC as these methods are associated with significantly lower odds of having positive margins and higher breast-conservation rates.

Background Many patients undergoing total-skin sparing mastectomy (TSSM) and 2-staged expander-implant (TE-I) reconstruction require postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). Additionally, many patients undergoing TSSM for recurrent cancer have a history of lumpectomy and radiation therapy (XRT). Few studies have looked at the impact of XRT on the stages of TE-I reconstruction. Methods Patients undergoing TSSM and immediate TE-I reconstruction between 2006 and 2013 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Rates of TE-I loss and severe infection requiring intravenous antibiotics were compared in patients with prior XRT (85 cases) and PMRT (133 cases). Complications were divided by stage of reconstruction: first stage (TSSM and TE placement) and second stage (TE-I exchange). Results Mean follow-up time was 2.5 years. Patients with prior XRT had more complications after the first stage of reconstruction than the second (TE-I loss: 15% vs 5%, P = 0.03; infection: 20% vs 8%, P = 0.04). Patients receiving PMRT had low complication rates after the first stage, when they had not yet received radiation (TE-I loss: 2%; infection: 5%). However, complication rates after TE-I exchange (TE-I loss, 18%; infection, 31%) were significantly higher, and nearly 4-fold higher than patients with prior XRT. Conclusions Patients with prior XRT are at high risk for complications after the first stage of TE-I reconstruction after TSSM; however, the risk of complications at the second stage is comparable to patients without radiation exposure and significantly lower than patients receiving PMRT. Patients receiving radiation therapy should be given appropriate preoperative counseling regarding their risks.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has emerged as an excellent technique for postmastectomy reconstruction, as it allows for full preservation of a patient's pectoralis major muscle and chest wall function. This reduces pain, eliminates animation deformity, and results in high patient satisfaction. Safely performed prepectoral breast reconstruction requires a careful patient selection process before committing to the procedure, taking into account comorbidities, radiation status, and oncologic criteria such as tumor location and breast cancer stage. Furthermore, a thorough intraoperative assessment of mastectomy skin flaps is critical, with careful and precise confirmation that the skin is viable and well perfused, prior to proceeding with prepectoral breast reconstruction. This can be done both clinically and with perfusion assessment devices. The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has enhanced outcomes and aesthetics of prepectoral reconstruction, by providing implant coverage and soft-tissue support. The ADM also adds the benefit of reducing capsular contracture rates and offers full control over the aesthetic definition of the newly reconstructed breast pocket. Aesthetic enhancement of results requires routine use of oversizing implants in the skin envelope, careful selection of full capacity or cohesive gel implants, and autologous fat grafting. In this way, patients in all clinical scenarios can benefit from the full muscle-sparing technique of prepectoral breast reconstruction, including those undergoing immediate reconstruction, delayed reconstruction, and delayed conversion from a subpectoral to prepectoral plane to correct animation deformity.

Background:Nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate prosthetic reconstruction is routinely performed because of excellent aesthetic results and safe oncologic outcomes. Typically, subpectoral expanders are placed, but in select patients, this can lead to significant postoperative pain and animation

Introduction Plantar melanoma tumors are traditionally treated with wide local excision based on depth of invasion, followed by delayed reconstruction once negative surgical margins are confirmed. However, delayed reconstruction requires care for an open wound, a prolonged treatment course, and the need for an additional surgery. Immediate reconstruction has been shown to be oncologically safe in head and neck melanoma, but little is described in the literature regarding immediate reconstruction in plantar melanoma. We present our experience with immediate reconstruction after wide local excision for lower extremity plantar melanomas. Methods We performed a retrospective review of all patients with biopsy-proven plantar melanoma who underwent wide local excision followed by immediate reconstruction of any type between 1999 and 2014 at the University of California, San Francisco. Patient demographics, postoperative complications, reoperation rates, and oncologic outcomes were collected. Results Thirty-eight patients were identified, with a mean follow-up of 34 months. Skin grafts were the most common method of reconstruction, followed by primary closure, local flaps, and free flaps. Only 1 patient had a major complication, which was skin graft loss requiring reoperation. Eight patients had either local or distant recurrence (21%). Discussion Immediate reconstruction for plantar melanomas can be safely performed with recurrence rates comparable and in line with previously published studies of wide local excision for plantar melanoma. This technique has the potential to achieve oncologically safe outcomes with less overall morbidity.

Approximately 50,000 women in the United States undergo mastectomy and immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction annually, and most receive postoperative prophylactic antibiotics. The effect of these antibiotics on the risk of surgical-site infections remains unclear.The authors searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that compared less than 24 hours and greater than 24 hours of antibiotics following immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction. Primary outcomes were surgical-site infections and implant loss. Conservative random effects models were used to obtain pooled relative risk estimates.The authors identified 927 studies, but only four cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial met their inclusion criteria. Unadjusted incidences of surgical-site infections were 14 percent with more than 24 hours of antibiotics, 19 percent with less than 24 hours of antibiotics, and 16 percent overall. Unadjusted incidences of implant loss were 8 percent with more than 24 hours of antibiotics, 10 percent with less than 24 hours of antibiotics, and 9 percent overall. The pooled relative risk of implant loss was 1.17 (95 percent CI, 0.39 to 3.6) with less than 24 hours of antibiotics, which was not statistically significant.Prolonged antibiotic use did not have a statistically significant effect on reducing surgical-site infections or implant loss. There was significant heterogeneity between studies, and prolonged antibiotics may have increased the risk of implant loss in the randomized controlled trial. Definitive evidence may only be obtained with data from more prospective randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION The combined approach using both an implant and autologous tissue for breast reconstruction has become more common over the last 10 years. We sought to provide a systematic review and outcomes analysis of this technique. METHODS We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library database to identify studies that described implant augmentation of autologous flaps for breast reconstruction. The references of selected articles were also reviewed to identify any additional pertinent articles. RESULTS We identified 11 articles, which included 230 patients and 378 flaps. Implants used ranged in size from 90 to 510 cc, with an average size of 198 cc. Implants were more frequently placed at the time of autologous reconstruction and in the subpectoral plane. There were no total flap losses, and partial flap loss occurred in 3 patients (1%). There were no cases of venous or arterial thrombosis and no early return to the operating room for flap compromise. Eight implants (2%) were lost because of infection or extrusion, and capsular contracture occurred in 9 breasts (3%). When stratified by the timing of implant placement (immediate vs delayed), there were no significant differences in any postoperative outcomes except the immediate group had a higher infection rate. CONCLUSIONS The criteria for women to be candidates for autologous tissue breast reconstruction can be expanded by adding an implant underneath the flap. We found the overall flap loss rate is comparable with standard autologous flap reconstruction, and the implant loss rate is lower than that in patients who undergo prosthetic reconstruction alone.

Background Advances in medicine and surgery have allowed patients, who in the past would have required more aggressive amputations, to maintain longer stump lengths. Microvascular free tissue transfer has become increasingly popular to preserve limb length and optimize functionality. We present our experience using microvascular free flap reconstruction to preserve lower extremity limb length in the setting of high-energy trauma. Methods We conducted an Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective review of patients at three San Francisco hospitals who underwent free flap reconstruction after high-energy trauma between 2003 and 2015. We included all patients who underwent free flap reconstruction for lower extremity limb length preservation. We reviewed patient demographics, preoperative variables, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes, including complications, functional status, reoperation rates, and need for revision amputation. Results Twelve patients underwent microvascular free tissue transfer for limb length preservation. Overall, the patients had similar preoperative comorbidities and a mean age of 44. Six patients had postoperative complications: three minor complications and three major complications. Seven patients had additional surgeries to improve the contour of the flap. One patient required revision amputation, while the remaining 11 patients preserved their original limb length. The majority of patients were fully ambulatory, and four used a prosthesis. Conclusion Microvascular free tissue transfer can be used to effectively maintain lower extremity stump length following trauma. Although these patients often require multiple surgeries and face lengthy hospital courses, this technique enables preservation of a functional extremity that would otherwise require a more proximal amputation.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction carries many benefits to patients, including its minimally invasive (muscle-sparing) nature, and its reduction in symptoms such as pain and animation deformity, relative to subpectoral reconstruction. However, without the traditional use of the pectoralis major muscle to mask the upper pole of the implant, and dictate the shape of the upper pole, certain steps must be taken to ensure the optimal aesthetic outcome in prepectoral reconstruction. Surgeons have utilized acellular dermal matrices, fat grafting, and highly cohesive implants to improve outcomes. Among the most important steps is the proper implant selection. To this end, the authors routinely utilize round form-stable gel implants, when performing prepectoral breast reconstruction. These implants offer improved aesthetic outcomes, given their ability to reduce rates of rippling and edge visibility. Furthermore, the characteristics of a soft and naturally shaped breast are achieved despite the lack of muscle coverage. The authors believe that reproducibly successful prepectoral reconstruction is dependent on proper technique. In this article, we present the proper techniques necessary for optimizing outcomes when using these implants in 2-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Implant based reconstruction is still the most commonly employed method of post mastectomy reconstruction in the United States and internationally. Mastectomy techniques are improving, and adjuncts such as tissue perfusion technology and biologic implants allow for re-evaluation of traditional reconstructive methods. Subpectoral implant placement is used in a large majority of patients undergoing implant based reconstruction. However, with the advent of acellular dermal matrix (ADM), a “sling” for the expander and implant can be placed with surgical precision to create the optimal breast pocket. This has allowed for placement of the breast prosthesis in a prepectoral anatomic plane. The benefits are clear: avoidance of animation deformities and a significant decrease in pain that results from pectoralis mobilization and spasm. Here, we discuss specific techniques to avoid pitfalls and optimize aesthetic results with prepectoral breast reconstruction. Patient selection, intra-operative mastectomy flap evaluation, modifications in expander and implant fill, and technique specifics all play a critical role in this new, and rapidly growing method for implant based breast reconstruction.

“ Sometimes life brings you full circle to a place you have been before, just to show you how much you have grown. ” –Anonymous.

Background: Breast animation deformity is a known complication associated with submuscular prosthetic breast reconstruction. Patients often will present months to years after their initial reconstruction complaining of chronic pain and visible contraction deformity of their chest, with minimal voluntary activation of their pectoralis musculature. This is aesthetically displeasing and physically uncomfortable. Our preferred method for addressing existing animation deformity and alleviating patients’ symptoms involves reoperation, with implant pocket conversion to the prepectoral plane, with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) coverage. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent prepectoral conversion of their breast reconstruction for correction of animation deformity with the senior author (HS) between March 2016–April 2018. Demographics, operative details, and post-operative outcomes were assessed. Results: Thirty-one patients underwent 55 revision breast reconstructions for a history of significant animation deformity following their initial submuscular breast reconstruction. All initial breast reconstructions were done with partial muscular coverage of their implant at the time of reconstruction. All patients experienced complete resolution of animation deformity without recurrence. Unplanned return to the operating room occurred in 14.5% of reconstructions. This was four cases of capsular contracture, three infections and one hematoma evacuation. Overall rate of infection requiring intravenous antibiotics was 14.5%. One patient lost both of her reconstructed breasts for an overall implant loss rate of 1.8% implant coverage with ADM was performed in 83.6% of cases, whereas 16.4% of reconstructions were performed with implant pocket change alone. The cohort that did not use ADM had a 44.4% instance of capsular contracture requiring reoperation, compared to a 0% rate of capsular contracture when ADM was used (P

Background Deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps are routinely elevated on a single dominant perforator from the deep epigastric vascular system. However, the single perforator may not always perfuse an entire flap adequately, particularly suprascarpal tissue. We often perform “dual-plane” single perforator DIEP flaps by rerouting the superficial (SIEA/V) system directly into a branch of the deep (DIEA/V) vascular system pedicle, thus allowing both systems to contribute and enhance flap perfusion. Methods A prospectively collected database of patients undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction was reviewed for patients undergoing “dual-plane” DIEP flaps. These were matched to a similar cohort of patients undergoing “traditional” single perforator DIEP free flaps over the same time period. Treatment demographics and flap-specific morbidity outcomes were assessed, including performance in the setting of radiation. Results Over 2 years, 23 “dual-plane” DIEP flaps were performed (15 patients), compared with 35 single-perforator “traditional” DIEP flaps (23 patients). Rates of delayed healing were similar between both cohorts (2.9 vs. 4.3%, p = 0.28). Rates of palpable fat necrosis were significantly lower in “dual-plane” DIEP flaps compared with “traditional” flaps (0 vs. 14.3%, p = 0.03). Rates of clinically palpable fat necrosis following radiation were significantly lower in the “dual-plane” flaps (4.3 vs. 40%, p = 0.02). Conclusion The “dual-plane” DIEP flap is one we routinely consider in our algorithm, as it allows for full preservation of functional abdominal musculature, and offers enhanced flap perfusion by incorporating both the deep and superficial (dominant) vascular systems. This results in lower fat necrosis rates, particularly in the setting of post-reconstruction radiation.

Total skin-sparing mastectomy (TSSM) has become increasingly frequent in recent years, as inclusion criteria continue to expand. Options for tissue expander coverage in these patients include complete submuscular tissue expander coverage and acellular dermal matrix (ADM)-assisted coverage. This study compares both techniques with regard to relevant outcomes, during a recent 1-year period at our institution.All women undergoing TSSM and immediate expander placement between January 2012 and January 2013 were prospectively tracked. Patient demographics, expander coverage type, adjuvant treatment, length and characteristics of expansion, and incidence of complications were analyzed.In 1 year, 127 patients underwent TSSM on 202 breasts. Overall, 113 expanders underwent submuscular coverage, and 89 underwent ADM-assisted coverage. Mean intraoperative fill volume was 52 mL in the submuscular cohort and 205 mL in the ADM cohort (P = 0.0001). Mean tissue expander size was 404 mL in the submuscular cohort and 454 mL in the ADM cohort (P = 0.0002). χ analysis demonstrated no differences between the cohorts in incidence of complications, including partial/complete nipple necrosis.The use of ADM for expander coverage after TSSM allowed for greater initial expander fill. With large and ptotic breasts, this allows for reduced incidence of skin folds in the preserved breast skin pocket, and greater control over final nipple position, as the amount of loose, mobile skin is reduced by the greater initial fill. The safety profile of ADM use after TSSM is equivalent to that of submuscular coverage, with no differences in partial or complete nipple necrosis.

Reconstruction of partial mastectomy defects with oncoplastic approaches has become increasingly popular as a strategy for improving aesthetic outcomes and extending the option of breast conservation therapy. However, interpretation of reported oncologic outcomes and postoperative complications has been challenging because of limited data and significant variability in surgical technique and degree of tissue rearrangement.Studies describing oncoplastic mammoplasty or partial mastectomy reconstruction were identified from the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Only studies reporting the use of oncoplastic reduction mammoplasty techniques with significant breast parenchymal rearrangement were included for analysis. Primary outcomes assessed were postoperative complications and oncologic outcomes, including local recurrence rates and need for re-excision or completion mastectomy.Seventeen articles met the inclusion criteria, representing 1324 oncoplastic cases. Reported follow-up ranged from 20 to 73 months. Of the 12 studies with at least 2 years' mean/median follow-up, the pooled local-regional recurrence rate was 3.1%. Fifteen articles reported re-excision and completion mastectomy rates (3.5% and 3.7%, respectively). Twelve articles reported postoperative complications. Overall, 4.6% of patients had wound dehiscence, 4.3% developed fat necrosis, 2.8% developed an infection, 0.9% had either partial or total nipple necrosis, and 0.6% had seromas.Partial mastectomy reconstruction with oncoplastic reduction techniques is associated with high rates of successful breast conservation and low rates of required re-excisions, likely due to the ability to take wide tumor margins without compromising aesthetic outcome. Future studies should consistently report complications, recurrences, and patient-reported outcomes to improve our ability to evaluate the use of this technique.

Axillary web syndrome (AWS) is a poorly understood but common cause of significant morbidity after axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer. It is characterized by painful scar tissue formation and contracture extending from the axilla down the medial arm which limits shoulder and arm mobility. We sought to gain a better understanding of its pathophysiology and available treatments. Additionally, we present our preliminary experience with 2 novel treatment methods: (1) percutaneous needle cord disruption with fat grafting, (2) Xiaflex injection to the cording.In order to gain better understanding of current treatment modalities, we performed a literature search to identify articles that described axillary cording after axillary dissection exclusively for breast cancer. We performed operative percutaneous cord disruption and immediate autologous fat grafting in 18 patients. Xiaflex injection was performed in one patient. Details from the 2 new treatment modalities are described.Described treatments in the literature include physical therapy, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, moist heat, and 1 case of Ascueven Forte. Typically, symptoms lasted from 1 week to 2 years, and most cases resolved by 3 months postoperatively with return to preoperative functionality. We found our 2 new treatment modalities markedly improved arm and shoulder range of motion, overall daily functioning, and pain. Aesthetic outcomes were also improved with softening of the cords.Axillary web syndrome remains an incompletely understood postoperative phenomenon, which warrants further research. Those patients who develop severe cording often do not respond to traditional therapy and may require more aggressive treatment. Our 2 novel techniques provide alternative options for treating this condition.

The surgical management of breast cancer has changed dramatically over the past 30 years, attributed to improved chemotherapy regimens and a better understanding of tumor biology. There is now a greater emphasis on decreasing surgical morbidity and preserving the breast form. The evolution of oncoplastic surgery has enabled more patients to be candidates for breast-conserving therapy, and the preservation of the entire skin and nipple areolar complex with mastectomy has markedly improved esthetic and patient-reported outcomes. This review provides an overview of the reconstructive options for partial and complete mastectomy, as well as discusses several key factors which markedly influence outcomes.

Introduction: There is no consensus among radiation oncologists regarding delivery of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) after immediate autologous breast reconstruction, and plastic surgeons rarely participate in this decision-making process. However, radiation-induced changes markedly influence flap outcomes and affect the flap permanently. We present an innovative approach for PMRT delivery, through the use of custom bolus. This technique provides individualized, targeted PMRT to the reconstructed breast to minimize flap-related complications. Methods: All patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate autologous reconstruction between 2005 and 2014 at our institution were identified. Radiation was delivered to the reconstructed autologous breast in 29 patients. Post-irradiation complications and reconstruction outcomes were compared for patients treated with custom bolus, standard PMRT, and historical controls. Results: Over the past 10 years, 157 patients (226 breasts) underwent immediate autologous tissue breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Of the 29 patients who received PMRT, 10 were treated with custom bolus. The custom bolus uses perforated Aquaplast and a nearly tissue-equivalent wax to form a cast which conforms to the irregular contours of the chest wall, allowing for easy application through the duration of treatment. Pre-irradiation computed tomography was used to optimize dose distribution, evaluate the internal mammary vessels, and target the deeper tissues adjacent to the chest wall (minimizing dose inhomogeneity to the skin). Custom bolus resulted in fewer radiation-induced skin changes and less skin tethering/fibrosis than standard bolus (0% vs 10% and 20% vs 35%, respectively), and less volume loss and contour deformities compared with historical controls (10% vs 22.8% and 10% vs 30.7%, respectively). Conclusion: The use of custom bolus tailors radiation delivery to the internal mammary vessels, anastomoses, and skin; uniformly doses the surgical incision; and provides the necessary radiation dose to prevent recurrence, thus not compromising oncologic safety. It is easily fabricated, cost-effective and placement is straightforward and reproducible. Because radiation has negative effects on autologous breast reconstruction and often results in vascular intimal fibrosis and fat necrosis, plastic surgeons should participate in radiation planning. Our custom bolus PMRT technique reduces the incidence of these radiation effects. Citation Format: Piper ML, Evangelista M, Amara D, Daar DA, Foster RD, Fowble B, Sbitany H. An innovative risk-reducing approach to post-mastectomy radiation delivery following autologous breast reconstruction. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-13-01.