Adipose perforator flaps without skin donor site: "in between" single scar approach for reconstruction of small peripheral breast defects after lumpectomy

In breast conserving surgery, the reconstruction of defects in small breasts where volume displacement techniques are not feasible can be challenging. In contrast, patients with bigger breasts may not wish to undergo major breast remodeling surgery or breast symmetrization procedures. In such cases, volume replacement techniques can be beneficial, but these leave additional scars and are time consuming. The authors propose an "in between" single scar approach to perform both lumpectomy and reconstruction of small peripheral breast tumors. This approach reduces morbidity and operating time compared with standard volume replacement techniques. The tumors are resected from below, guided by wire, using an incision in the lateral breast crease or inframammary fold, depending on their location. The same incision is used to raise an adipose or adipofascial flap based on perimammary perforators, lateral thoracic artery perforator flap (LTAP), lateral intercostal artery perforator flap (LICAP), or anterior intercostal artery perforator flaps (AICAP) flaps, without skin donor site. Between March and November 2022, eight patients underwent this procedure. In four cases LICAP flap was used; in three-AICAP flap was chosen; and in one-LTAP perforator flap was used. Clear surgical margins were achieved in all cases. The average follow-up time was 9.9 months, during which no local recurrences were detected. All flaps survived. Two patients experienced seromas at the donor site, and an organized hematoma was also reported. This approach represents a viable alternative to volume displacement techniques or no reconstruction for small peripheral lumpectomy defects.

Chest wall perforator flaps for partial breast reconstruction after conservative surgery: Prospective analysis of safety and reliability

INTRODUCTION

Breast-conserving surgery associated with adjuvant radiotherapy is the state of the art in the surgical treatment of breast cancer. Oncoplastic surgery through dermo-adipose flaps based in perforating arteries (muscle sparing flaps) for partial reconstruction is increasingly used as a good option for avoiding musculocutaneous flaps. In this study we evaluate the outcomes of the use of chest wall perforator flaps in the replacement of partial breast volume.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of female patients that underwent a conservative oncoplastic surgery procedure with partial breast reconstruction using a dermo-adipose flap of perforating arteries of the chest wall was conducted between November 2020 and March 2022 at our centre. Primary outcomes were surgical morbidity, positive margins and reoperation rates. Characteristics associated with the occurrence of complications were further identified.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent the procedure of interest during the study period. The mean age was 55 years. The median larger dimension of the tumor was 23 mm. Lateral intercostal artery perforator (LICAP), lateral thoracic artery perforator (LTAP), a combined flap and Anterior Intercostal Artery Perforator/Medial Intercostal Artery Perforator (AICAP)/(MICAP) were performed in 22, 16, 2 and 5 patients, respectively. The mean operative time was 126 min. A total of 9 (20.0%) patients required a reoperation after definitive diagnosis, 4 due to positive margins and 5 due to immediate/early surgical morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Local perforator flaps in oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery are a good option for immediate reconstruction after conservative surgery, showing low morbidity and favourable outcomes.

'PartBreCon' study. A UK multicentre retrospective cohort study to assess outcomes following PARTial BREast reCONstruction with chest wall perforator flaps

BACKGROUND

Partial breast reconstruction with a pedicled chest wall perforator flap (CWPF) enables breast conservation in a higher tumour: breast volume ratio scenario. Since there is limited evidence, this retrospective cohort study aimed to ascertain immediate (30-days) and medium-term (follow-up duration) surgical outcomes.

METHODS

STROBE-compliant protocol ascertained CWPF outcomes between March 2011-March 2021. UK centres known to perform CWPF were invited to participate if they performed at least 10 cases. Data were retrospectively collected, including patient demographics, tumour and treatment characteristics, and surgical and oncological outcomes. Statistical analysis (R™) included multivariable logistic regression and sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Across 15 centres, 507 patients with median age (54 years, IQR; 48-62), body mass index (25.4 kg/m2, IQR; 22.5-29), tumour size (26 mm, IQR; 18-35), and specimen weight (62 g, IQR; 40-92) had following flap types: LiCAP (54.1%, n = 273), MiCAP/AiCAP (19.6%, n = 99), LiCAP + LTAP (19.8%, n = 100) and TDAP (2.2%, n = 11). 30-days complication rates were in 12%: haematoma (4.3%, n = 22), wound infection (4.3%, n = 22), delayed wound healing (2.8%, n = 14) and flap loss (0.6%, n = 3; 1 full) leading to readmissions (2.6%, n = 13) and re-operations (2.6%, n = 13). Positive margins (n = 88, 17.7%) led to 15.9% (n = 79) re-excisions, including 7.5% (n = 37) at the planned 2nd of 2-stage surgery and 1.8% (n = 9) mastectomy. At median 23 months (IQR; 11-39) follow-up, there were 1.2% (n = 6) symmetrisations; recurrences: local (1%), regional/nodal (0.6%) and distant (3.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

This large multicentre cohort study demonstrates acceptable complication and margin re-excision rates. CWPF extends the range of breast conservation techniques. Further studies are required for long-term oncological outcomes.

Modified chest wall lateral intercostal artery perforator (MCW-LICAP) flap: a versatile flap in the era of oncoplastic breast surgery

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction following oncological resection is becoming more common in recent years. In some ladies, implant reconstruction is not ideal due to significant implant visibility or palpability. Autologous reconstruction addresses the limitations of implant reconstruction but results in potential donor site morbidities. To date, there is no clear advantage ascribed to any technique. With appropriate selection, patients with adequate lateral mammary fold have the option of reconstruction with MCW-LICAP flap. We present our techniques and outcomes from a series of 29 patients who underwent MCW-LICAP flap.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for breast cancer with immediate MCW-LICAP flap reconstruction, between July 2018 to April 2022 was conducted. The techniques used with its variations along with video demonstrations are presented.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients underwent 34 procedures. Nineteen breast conserving surgeries and 15 mastectomies were completed, and immediate reconstruction performed in all cases. Twenty-three patients had MCW-LICAP, 1 with a Stacked intercostal artery perforator (STICAP) flap, and 5 had MCW-LICAP combined with a Goldilocks mastectomy. There were no cases of complications requiring re-operation. All patients had acceptable time to adjuvant therapy with a median of 36 days. Learning curve analysis showed a significant reduction in operative time after the 6th case.

CONCLUSION

In our preliminary experience, MCW-LICAP flap is a safe, reliable, and versatile oncoplastic reconstruction option.

Lateral chest wall perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Breast conserving surgery (BCS) has been a standard procedure for the treatment of breast cancer instead of mastectomy whenever possible. Lateral chest wall perforator flaps are one of the volume replacement techniques that participate in increasing the rate of BCS especially in small- to moderate-sized breasts with good cosmetic outcome. In this study, we tried to evaluate the outcome of those flaps as an oncoplastic procedure instead of the conventional flaps.

METHODS

This study included 26 patients who underwent partial mastectomy with immediate reconstruction using lateral chest wall perforator flaps in the period from October 2019 to November 2020. The operative time, techniques, and complications were recorded. The cosmetic outcome was assessed 3 months post-radiation therapy through a questionnaire and photographic assessment.

RESULTS

Lateral intercostal artery perforator (LICAP), lateral thoracic artery perforator (LTAP) and combined flaps were performed in 24, 1, and 1 patients, respectively. The mean operative time was 129.6 ± 13.2 min. The flap length ranged from 10 to 20 cm and its width from 5 to 9 cm. Overall patients' satisfaction was observed to be 88.5% as either excellent or good and the photographic assessment was 96.2% as either excellent or good.

CONCLUSIONS

Lateral chest wall perforator flaps are reliable and safe option for partial breast reconstruction with an acceptable aesthetic outcome. In the era of oncoplastic breast surgery, they deserve to gain attention especially with the advantages of some modifications added to the classic technique.

Use of licap and ltap flaps for breast reconstruction

Breast conserving surgery has been reserved for patients with favorable proportion between tumor dimensions and breast size. Introduction of local flaps from the lateral thoracic region has widened the indications for breast conserving surgery, by allowing surgeons to perform wider excisions, thus yet be able to ensure tumor-free surgical margins and a good aesthetic result. We have used lateral intercostal perforator flaps and flaps harvested on the lateral thoracic artery and lateral thoracic artery axial flap in patients with small breasts and an unfavorable tumor to breast size proportion. From May 2015 to October 2016, 19 patients with breast tumors have been treated with BCS and immediate volume replacement reconstruction by pedicle perforator flaps from the lateral thoracic region. In 15 patients lateral intercostal artery perforator flaps or lateral thoracic artery perforator flaps were used after quadrantectomy or wide local excision, in 3 patients as volume replacement after mastectomy and in 1 patient after mastectomy following previous augmentation mammoplasty. In all patients, good breast symmetry was achieved, with no major complications. Fibrosis of the flap and residual breast parenchyma, with volume reduction were noticed after postoperative radiotherapy in thin patients or flaps with little subcutaneous fat. Perforator flaps from the lateral thoracic region should become the gold standard for reconstructions after breast conserving surgery involving less than 20% of the breast volume or after mastectomy in patients with small breasts. The operating procedure is safe, quick and allows sparing of the latissimus dorsi muscle and thus minimal donor site morbidity, as well as an excellent aesthetic result.

Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: What, When and for Whom?

Oncoplastic surgery is integral to all breast cancer surgeries. The use of an aesthetic approach to breast conservation or mastectomy greatly enhances the range of options that can be offered to women with breast cancer and facilitates better outomes from it. It should be the standard of care. However, a structured approach to selecting appropriate techniques is essential, and although many operative procedures are reported, this article sets out to describe a set of principles and an algorithm by which the what, when and for whom for oncoplastic surgery can be defined.