Oncoplastic breast surgery with latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap for large defect in patients with ptotic breasts: is it feasible when combined with local flaps?

Oncoplastic breast surgery in older women with primary breast cancer: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic procedures allow excision of larger breast tumours, or unfavourable tumour/breast ratio lesions while achieving a good cosmetic outcome. This increases the pool of patients eligible for breast conservation over mastectomy, reducing the need for more extensive surgery in older women and potentially improving their quality of life. Nonetheless, studies to date suggest a poor uptake of oncoplastic breast surgery in the older group. This review aimed to establish whether a disparity in uptake of oncoplastic breast surgery exists between older and younger women, and to explore the underlying reasons for this.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on 17 January 2022 using MEDLINE and Embase. Eligible studies comprised full-text articles of patients who underwent oncoplastic breast surgery for primary invasive breast cancer, and included those aged at least 65 years.

RESULTS

Ten published studies were identified. One study was ranked as providing level 2 evidence, and the remainder were level 3. A total of 567 women underwent oncoplastic breast surgery for primary breast cancer, of whom only 61 (10.8 per cent) were aged 65 years or older. None of the studies directly compared younger with older women, or explored the underlying factors contributing to this discrepancy in uptake.

CONCLUSION

This review has demonstrated a lower uptake of oncoplastic breast surgery in older compared with younger women. Given the increasing number of older women living with breast cancer who may be eligible for breast-conserving surgery, further research into this area is required.

Latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap repair is effective after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical outcome and physical condition of patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by mastectomy and latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap repair.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 142 patients with locally advanced breast cancer was selected from 1156 breast cancer patients in the South and North areas of The Affiliated Calmette Hospital of Kunming Medical University between May 2008 and December 2018.

RESULTS

All participants (n = 142) were women aged 40-55 years (average age 47.35 ± 0.43 years) who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by mastectomy and latissimus dorsi flap repair. The median follow-up period was 16 months (range 12-24 months). For stage of disease, there were 19 cases (13%) in stage IIB, 31 cases (22%) in stage IIIA, 39 cases (28%) in stage IIIB, and 53 cases (37%) in stage IIIC, which were statistically significant with the physical condition of patients (≤ 0.001). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to shrink the tumors, and an average tumor size decrease from 10.05 ± 1.59 cm × (8.07 ± 1.54) cm to 6.11 ± 1.72 cm × (3.91 ± 1.52) cm (P < 0.001) was considered statistically significant. A t test was used for the ECOG score statistics, and the results showed that the scores were statistically significant (≤ 0.001) before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an accepted treatment option for patients with locally advanced breast cancer, and the use of a latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap for post-mastectomy reconstruction may improve the patients' physical condition. Our results indicated that this strategy was safe and feasible.

Outcomes in volume replacement and volume displacement techniques in oncoplastic breast conserving surgery: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Volume Replacement (VR-OBCS) and Volume Displacement Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery (VD-OBCS) are commonly used in the management of breast cancer. Many studies summarize the individual postoperative outcomes of these two procedures; however, there is a lack of research that compares outcomes of these approaches. This review summarizes the available VR and VD-OBCS literature in terms of oncological, cosmetic, and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

An online literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and CINAHL) was performed. Studies were included if they were written in English, had more than 10 adult (18+) female patients who underwent VR-OBCS or VD-OBCS, and reported at least one well-described oncological, clinical, or cosmetic outcome RESULTS: Thirty-three studies (26 VR-OBCS and 7 VD-OBCS) were included in this review; VR-OBCS studies were separated based on the use of latissimus dorsi (LD) flaps. Studies utilizing VR-OBCS with LD flaps reported the highest rate of all oncological outcomes; VR-OBCS studies without LD flaps reported the lowest. Rates of hematoma, seroma, and wound dehiscence were highest in VR-OBCS with LD flaps; partial flap loss and fat necrosis were highest in VR-OBCS without LD flaps and infection was highest in VD-OBCS studies. Inconsistencies in methodology (cosmetic outcome measures, outcome definitions, and time horizons) were found in all procedural groups.

CONCLUSION

Differences in outcomes for both OBCS procedures may be due to the heterogeneity of patient populations. "Doers" and "Users" of breast oncoplastic research should consider tumor size, laterality of tumor, breast size, measurement scales, and defensible time horizons before the application of a study's conclusions.

Ambulatory latissimus dorsi flap breast reconstruction: A prospective cohort study of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols improve quality of recovery and decrease length of stay for patients undergoing both alloplastic and autologous breast reconstruction. Their use in latissimus dorsi (LD) flap reconstruction has not been well established. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes, length of stay, and total costs in a prospectively enrolled group of patients who underwent LD flap breast reconstruction using an ERAS protocol to those of a retrospective cohort of patients who were treated with a traditional recovery after surgery (TRAS) protocol.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study conducted from 2016 to 2019, an ERAS protocol was implemented for patients undergoing LD flap breast reconstruction. The primary outcome was 24-h discharge, and secondary outcomes were readmission rate, complications, and quality of recovery. Outcomes of patients who underwent LD flap reconstruction with the ERAS protocol were compared with those of a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent LD flap reconstruction with TRAS protocols.

RESULTS

Twenty patients enrolled in the ERAS group were compared with 58 patients in the TRAS group. Postoperatively, 100% of ERAS patients were discharged within 24 h (60% on the same day) as compared to 21% (9% on the same day) in the TRAS group (p<0.0001). Minor and major complication rates were similar (30% ERAS vs. 33% TRAS and 20% ERAS vs. 10% TRAS, respectively, p > 0.05). There was significant reduction in length of stay and total cost between the two groups (6.4 h vs. 58.5 h (p = 0.003) and $5,666.80 vs. $8890.25 (p = 0.0003), respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Breast reconstruction with the LD flap can be performed safely and effectively in the ambulatory setting. The implementation of an ERAS protocol was successful in discharging all patients home within 24 h, and the expedited discharge was associated with an acceptable complication rate, reduced length of stay, and excellent quality of recovery. Conversion from TRAS to ERAS protocols was associated with $3,223.45 cost savings per patient.

Management of Implant Exposure in One-Stage Breast Reconstruction Using Titanium-Coated Polypropylene Mesh: Sub-Mammary Intercostal Perforator Flap

INTRODUCTION

One-stage implant-based breast reconstruction using titanium-coated polypropylene mesh is a novel approach widely used in Europe. Complication rates in breast reconstruction with the use of titanium-coated meshes seem to be comparable to those in patients with implant-based breast reconstruction alone. However, the use of synthetic meshes in implant-based breast reconstructive surgery leads to new clinical scenarios with the need for the breast surgeon to face new complications. We present an innovative treatment of implant exposure in the absence of infection in patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with silicone implants and titanium-coated polypropylene mesh by using a pedicled sub-mammary intercostal perforator flap.

CASES PRESENTATION

Four patients who experienced implant exposure without infection have been treated with the use of a sub-mammary intercostal perforator flap. Whole coverage of the exposed implant/mesh with a sub-mammary intercostal perforator flap was obtained in all cases. No post-operative complications have been observed, whereas a pleasant aesthetic result has been achieved. Patients' post-operative quality of life and satisfaction levels were measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality of life QLQ-BR23 questionnaire and showed an average good satisfaction with the post-operative outcomes (mean QLQ-BR23 score 1.9).

DISCUSSION

For the first time, a sub-mammary intercostal perforator flap has been used with the aim of treating implant exposures without removing the prosthesis even in the presence of synthetic meshes, when wound infection was excluded. Although tested on a small series, the sub-mammary intercostal perforator flap might represent a simple, versatile and cost-effective procedure for the management of implant exposure following nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with silicone implants and synthetic meshes. It should be considered to avoid implant removal followed by delayed free flap reconstruction as "salvage surgery."

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

This journal requires that the authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .