Rationale: Lateral chest flaps represent versatile reconstructive options, especially valuable in times of global healthcare resource restriction. In this series, we present our experience with the use of lateral chest wall flaps in both immediate and delayed reconstruction from both breast conserving and mastectomy surgery. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients who had undergone a lateral chest wall flap for immediate or delayed breast reconstruction of a lumpectomy or mastectomy defect was performed. Data collected consisted of patient demographics, procedure type, tumor/oncological characteristics, as well as postoperative complications. Findings: Between September 2015 and April 2021, 26 patients underwent breast reconstruction using a lateral chest wall flap. Fifteen patients (58%) underwent immediate reconstruction (9 lumpectomy; 6 mastectomy) and 11 (42%) underwent delayed breast reconstruction. All flaps survived, though 1 patient required partial flap debridement following venous compromise hours after surgery. There were no incidences of hematoma, seroma, infection, or wound healing delay at either the donor site or breast. There was one positive margin which occurred in a mastectomy patient. Significance: This study describes the use of lateral chest wall flaps in a wide variety of reconstructive breast surgery scenarios. This technique can be safely performed in an outpatient setting and does not require microvascular techniques. Review of our outcomes and complications demonstrate that this is a safe and effective option. Our experience is that this is an easy to learn, versatile flap that could be a valuable addition to the surgeon's arsenal in breast reconstruction.

SUMMARY Background Pre-operative estimation of breast mound volume for immediate breast reconstruction is necessary for operative planning, especially in direct-to-implant reconstruction. Our purpose was to investigate the relationship between pre-operative predictions of breast mound weight from 3D imaging and actual mastectomy weight and implant size. Methods A retrospective chart review of all patients who had previously undergone nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) by a single surgeon was performed. Pre-operative 3D images were reviewed and calculations of breast mound weight were performed by three independent reviewers. Intra-operative mastectomy weight and final implant weight were collected from patient charts. A regression analysis between calculated and actual values was performed. Results There were 59 reconstructed breasts included. Pre-operative 3D imaging-guided breast weight calculations were similar across reviewers (R=0.96). Pre-operative calculations of breast weight were 49.4g (SD=134.0) smaller than actual mastectomy specimens. Mastectomy specimens were 41.0g (SD=130.2) smaller than final implant sizes. Thereby, the relationship was as follows: Pre-operative calculated breast weight < actual Mastectomy weight < implant weight. Mastectomy weight and final implant size had linear relationships with pre-operative calculations of breast weight. Formulas for predicting mastectomy weight [mastectomy weight = 63.2 + 0.95 (pre-operative calculated weight)] and implant size [Implant weight = 209.7+ 0.56 (pre-operative calculated weight)] from pre-operative calculations of breast weight were generated. Conclusions Three-dimensional scanning technologies may be a useful tool to predict implant sizes for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Final implant size was heavier than intra-operative mastectomy weight and pre-operative calculated breast mound weight.