Abstract
Background
Although free abdominal flaps constitute the gold standard in post-radiation delayed breast reconstruction, latissimus dorsi-based methods offer alternative reconstructive options. This retrospective study aims to compare outcomes of delayed breast reconstruction using the fat-augmented latissimus dorsi (FALD) autologous reconstruction and the latissimus dorsi-plus-implant reconstruction in irradiated women.
Methods
We reviewed the files of 47 post-mastectomy irradiated patients (aged 29–73 years), who underwent delayed latissimus dorsi-based breast reconstruction between 2010 and 2016. Twenty-three patients (Group A) had an extended FALD flap and twenty-four patients (Group B) an implant-based latissimus dorsi reconstruction. Patients' age, BMI, pregnancies, volume of injected fat, implant size, postoperative complications, and secondary surgical procedures were recorded and analyzed.
Results
Age, BMI, pregnancies, and donor-site complications were similar in both groups (p > 0.05). Mean fat volume injected initially was 254 cc (ranged 130–380 cc/session); mean implant volume was 323 cc (ranged 225–420 cc). Breast complications were significantly fewer in Group A (one wound dehiscence, two oily cysts) compared to Group B (three cases with wound dehiscence, two extrusions, thirteen severe capsular contractions). Non-statistically significant difference was documented for secondary procedures between groups; although the mean number of additional surgeries/patient was higher in Group A, they referred to secondary lipofilling, whereas in Group B they were revision surgeries for complications.
Conclusions
The FALD flap constitutes an alternative method for delayed autologous reconstruction after post-mastectomy irradiation, avoiding implant-related complications. Although additional fat graft sessions might be required, it provides an ideal autogenous reconstructive option for thin nulliparous women, with a small opposite breast and adequate fat donor sites.
Level of Evidence IV
This journal requires that 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.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου
Σημείωση: Μόνο ένα μέλος αυτού του ιστολογίου μπορεί να αναρτήσει σχόλιο.