Two-Stage Latissimus Dorsi Flap with Implant for Unilateral Breast Reconstruction: Getting the Size Right

Comparison of Effects of Acellular Dermal Matrix and Latissimus Dorsi Muscle Flap on Radiation-induced Peri-implant Capsular Contracture in a Rabbit Model

Background  Capsular contracture of breast implants is a major complication in breast surgery. Clinically, covering a breast implant with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) or autologous tissue is considered to be the most effective technique to prevent capsular contracture. This study was designed to compare the protective effects of ADM and latissimus dorsi (LD) muscle flap placement on capsular contracture by increasing the rate of capsular contracture through controlled radiation exposure in a rabbit model. Methods  Twenty New Zealand white rabbits were divided into three groups. After the implant was placed beneath the pectoralis major muscle, the lateral third of the implant was left exposed in the control group ( n  = 6). In the ADM group ( n  = 7), the exposed implant was covered with AlloDerm. In the LD flap group ( n  = 7), the exposed implant was covered with a pedicled LD muscle flap. All groups were irradiated 3 weeks after implant insertion. After 6 months, peri-implant tissues were harvested and analyzed. Results  ADM showed markedly lower myofibroblast activity than the LD flap. However, transforming growth factor-β1 levels and the activity of collagen types I and III produced in fibroblasts were significantly lower in the ADM group than in the LD flap group. Conclusion  Based on the findings of our rabbit experiments, ADM is expected to have a comparative advantage in reducing the risk of capsular contracture compared to the LD flap.

An updated systematic review of esthetic grading tools in postmastectomy breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We ascertained whether a validated esthetic grading tool for breast reconstruction had been developed and widely adopted since the last published systematic review on the topic from 2015.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review identifying all studies using a grading tool to assess breast reconstruction, using search terms associated with all types of breast surgery and outcomes research. Articles were assessed for patient number, validated scale use, assessor type and training, assessor blinding, assessment method, scoring system type, type and timing of reconstruction, and usage of corroborating scales.

RESULTS

Of 2809 articles screened, 148 met the criteria. Only 3 used a validated tool, the Esthetic Items Scale. Most used study-only tools (n = 111) or unvalidated tools (n = 28). The most used unvalidated tool was the Garbay/Lowery 5-subscale rubric. Unanchored Likert scales were the most common subjective tool; two-dimensional images were the most used medium. Surgeons, patients, and nurses were the most common assessors. Twenty percent of studies used corroborating scales.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of a validated esthetic grading tool for breast reconstruction, researchers continue to rely on unvalidated scales. The only validated scale available is used infrequently and only validated among physicians. A validated, reliable, simple grading tool with clinical and scholastic relevance is needed.

Latissimus dorsi muscle flap transfer through endoscopic approach combined with the implant after tissue expansion for breast reconstruction of mastectomy patients

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction is easy to be performed but has flaws that an unnatural appearance might be presented when no sufficient coverage existing. While autologous tissue reconstruction also has disadvantages like donor site scar and skin patch effect. There is a demand for a new method to obtain natural and aesthetic appearance while surmounting drawbacks of conventional breast reconstruction surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review of thirty-one patients undergoing tissue expander (TE)/implant two-stage breast reconstruction with latissimus dorsi muscle flap (LDMF) transfer through endoscopic approach in Peking University Third Hospital from April 2016 to August 2020 was performed. The LDMF harvest time, drain time, and complications were reviewed. The 3D volume was obtained to assess the volume symmetry of bilateral breasts. The BREAST-Q reconstruction module was used to evaluate the satisfaction.

RESULTS

The mean endoscopic LDMF harvest time was 90.4 min. In the mean follow-up of 11.2 months, there were no severe capsular contracture happened. The reconstructed side achieved good volume symmetry to the contralateral side (P = 0.256). Based on the evaluation of the BREAST-Q scores, the outcome of Satisfaction with Breasts was excellent or good in 87.1% of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel type of two-stage breast reconstruction protocol, which includes tissue expansion followed by implant insertion with endoscopy-assisted LDMF transfer, could effectively reduce visible scars, avoid the patch effect, while require short time for LDMF harvest and present low incidence of complications. It is a promising method for breast reconstruction because it achieves good outcomes in the mastectomy patients.

Multistage Latissimus Dorsi Flap with Implant for Complex Post-Mastectomy Reconstruction: An Old but Still Current Technique

Introduction

The latissimus dorsi (LD) flap has been used for reconstructing mastectomy defects since the early 1900s. Although its popularity has declined over the last decades, it still retains an important role in breast reconstruction. We present our recent experience with the multistage LD flap and implant for extremely complex post-mastectomy defects.

Patients and Methods

Between 2011 and 2020, 42 consecutive patients underwent post-mastectomy LD reconstruction with an expander (STAGE 1). Some of them received prior fat-grafting of the mammary region (STAGE 0). All patients were scheduled for an expander-definitive implant change (STAGE 2). Some of them completed the program with fat-grafting, nipple and areola reconstruction, and other refinements (STAGE 3 or 4).

Results

Two patients underwent fat-grafting at STAGE 0. Mean age at STAGE 1 was 46.7 years, mean BMI was 23.6, 14.4% of the patients were smokers, and 21.4% had comorbidities. Immediate reconstructions were performed in 35.7% and delayed in 64.3%. Mean surgical time at STAGE 1 was 194.7 min for delayed reconstructions and 242.3 min for immediate ones. Mean hospital stay for STAGE 1 procedures was 3.8 days; all other STAGES were performed as ambulatory surgery. No flap necrosis was observed and only 1 patient required a surgical revision for bleeding. Dorsal seroma occurred in 45.2% of cases.

Conclusions

The multistage LD flap with implant is a useful and safe tool within the reconstructive armamentarium for post-mastectomy defects. It combines multiple simple procedures and does not require specific skills and surgical training (level of evidence 4).

Aesthetic outcomes and complications following post-mastectomy radiation therapy in patients undergoing immediate extended latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction and implant insertion

Background

Complications of radiotherapy after implant-based reconstruction include capsular contracture development, seroma formation, and reoperation for implant removal or replacement. However, there is a lack of studies regarding aesthetic outcomes and complication rates following radiation therapy among patients undergoing latissimus dorsi (LD) flap-based reconstruction with implant insertion for volume shortage. The present study aimed to evaluate clinical and aesthetic outcomes of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) among patients receiving both LD flap reconstruction and implant insertion.

Methods

This study comprised 66 patients who underwent mastectomy and breast reconstruction between March 2014 and July 2019. Patient demographics and outcomes were compared among patients who did and did not receive PMRT. Aesthetic outcomes were compared using gross photographs. The incidence of complications, including seroma formation, flap necrosis, nipple-areola complex necrosis, hematoma development, and capsular contractures, was compared between groups.

Results

No differences in aesthetic outcomes using gross photos during outpatient follow-up were observed between the radiation and control groups. No significant difference in the frequency of complications was observed between groups.

Conclusions

The use of implants and LD reconstruction are inevitable in a proportion of patients due to a lack of LD flap volume. For these patients, PMRT could be safe treatment option if the necessary precautions are implemented.

Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction

Latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap (LDMF) with tissue expander provides excellent results in breast reconstruction. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been used in expander-based reconstruction (EBR) with good results. This study assesses how ADM compares to LDMF in EBR.

Methods

The cohorts comprised 124 patients (218 breasts) who had EBR using ADM between 2006 and 2012, and 242 patients (266 breasts) who had EBR using LDMF between 1994 and 2012. Postoperative complications, reoperations, Breast-Q scores, and objectively assessed aesthetic outcomes were compared.

Results

Median age was 55 years for both ADM (range 23-84) and LDMF (range 26-88) groups. No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in the rates of major postoperative complications (P > 0.3). Forty-nine of the 218 (22.5%) in the ADM group and 67 of 266 (25.2%) in the LDMF group had a total of 63 and 84 reoperations, respectively (P = 0.52), with no significant differences in the reoperations rate (P > 0.3). No significant differences were observed in the Breast-Q scores. Some categorical differences were noted in the aesthetic outcomes; however, the difference between the overall outcomes was not significant (P = 0.54).

Conclusion

Our study revealed no statistically significant differences in the complications or reoperation rates, patient satisfaction, or overall aesthetic outcomes when comparing the use of ADM to LDMF in EBR. In conclusion, this study supports the hypothesis that ADM performs as well as LDMF in EBR.

Two-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction with latissimus flap: Prepectoral versus subpectoral approach

BACKGROUND

Use of latissimus flap in prosthetic breast reconstruction after mastectomy is an established approach, particularly in patients who have failed breast-conserving therapy. This study presents a comparison of the prepectoral and the subpectoral approach for two-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction with a latissimus flap.

METHODS

A retrospective review of outcomes and complications was completed between the prepectoral group (n = 33 patients, 50 reconstructed breasts) and the subpectoral group (n = 22 patients, 36 reconstructed breasts).

RESULTS

The demographics were similar between the prepectoral and subpectoral groups in terms of mean age (52.4 vs. 52.5 years, p = 0.97), smoking history (15.1% vs. 13.6%; p = 1.00), radiation history (75.8% vs. 91.0%; p = 0.28), and mean length of follow-up (479 vs. 680 days; p = 0.07). The body mass index was significantly higher in the prepectoral group (27.6 vs. 25.2 kg/m²; p = 0.03). Complications were similar between the groups in terms of hematoma (9.1% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.26), infection resulting in implant failure (9.1% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.64), thromboembolic events (3.0% vs. 4.5%, p = 1.0), donor site seroma (66.7% vs. 40.9%, p = 0.09), breast seroma (18.2% vs. 27.3%, p = 0.51), capsular contracture (9.1% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.64), animation deformity (39.4% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.58), and reoperation (24.2% vs. 22.8%, p = 1.00). Patient satisfaction scores were also similar between the groups (4.33 ± 1.08 vs. 4.14 ± 1.13, p = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

The prepectoral approach for two-stage immediate prosthetic reconstruction with a latissimus flap has similar outcomes and complications to those of the subpectoral approach, yet obviating the need for any pectoralis major muscle dissection.

A novel technique for large and ptotic breast reconstruction using a latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap set at the posterior aspect, combined with a silicone implant, following tissue expander surgery

Large and ptotic breast reconstruction in patients who are not candidates for a transverse rectus abdominalis myocutaneous flap and revision surgery for the contralateral breast remains challenging. We developed a novel breast reconstruction technique using a latissimus dorsi myocutaneous (LD m-c) flap set at the posterior aspect of the reconstructed breast, combined with an anatomical silicone breast implant (SBI), following tissue expander surgery. We performed the proposed technique in four patients, in whom the weight of the resected tissue during mastectomy was >500 g and the depth of the inframammary fold (IMF) was >3 cm. After over-expansion of the lower portion of the skin envelope by a tissue expander, the LD m-c flap was transferred to cover the lower portion of the breast defect and to achieve a ptotic contour, with the skin paddle set at the posterior aspect of the reconstructed breast. An SBI was then placed in the rest of the breast defect after setting the LD m-c flap. No major complications were observed during the follow-up period. The proposed technique resulted in symmetrical and aesthetically satisfactory breasts with deep IMFs, which allowed proper fitting of the brassiere, following large and ptotic breast reconstruction.

Combining Autologous and Prosthetic Techniques: The Breast Reconstruction Scale Principle

BACKGROUND

The latissimus dorsi (LD) flap remains a good option for immediate or delayed breast reconstruction. The main limitation of this flap is the small volume provided. To improve the reconstructed breast volume, the LD flap is usually combined with a breast implant. Recently, fat grafting to the LD flap was described to maximize flap volume and obtain a totally autologous breast reconstruction. We report our experience with hybrid breast reconstruction using both breast implants and fat-enriched latissimus dorsi (FELD) flaps.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2016, 74 patients underwent breast reconstruction with FELD flaps only or FELD flaps combined with a breast implant. The LD flap was harvested as previously described. Donor sites for fat harvesting were chosen according to each patient's natural fat distribution. Fat was harvested, centrifuged, and injected into the LD flap. After fat grafting, breast sizers were employed to determine the final breast volume when the addition of an implant was indicated.

RESULTS

Good cosmetic outcomes were achieved in all cases, with a mean follow-up of 2.1 years. No patients had cancer reoccurrences. Four patients experienced a seroma of the LD donor site, 1 had a breast hematoma, and 1 developed Baker grade III capsular contracture. One year postoperatively, a clinically relevant area of fat necrosis was observed in 1 patient and was surgically treated. Additional fat grafting sessions were required in 3 cases.

CONCLUSION

In elected cases, a FELD flap alone or in combination with a small implant is a valuable technique for breast reconstruction surgery.