These results suggest that there is no significant association between previously suspected risk factors and fat necrosis. The overall incidence of fat necrosis, however, is much higher than previously accepted, even though the need for corrective surgery is limited.
The anatomic topography of the perforators within the rectus muscle and the anterior fascia largely determines the time needed to harvest the perforator free flap and the difficulty of the procedure. In 100 consecutive cases, the topographic patterns of the perforators were investigated. In 65 percent, a short intramuscular course was seen. In 16 percent, a perforator at the tendinous intersection was encountered. In 9 percent, the largest perforator was found to have a long intramuscular course. In 5 percent, a subfascial course was found, and in another 5 percent, a paramedian course was found. In 74 percent of flaps, just one perforator was used, whereas two perforators were dissected in 20 percent. Only in 6 percent of flaps were three perforators used. A long intramuscular course (>4 cm) lengthens the dissection substantially, especially when the intramuscular course is in a step-wise pattern. The subfascial course requires precarious attention at the early stage of the perforator dissection when splitting the fascia. The perforators at the tendinous intersections are the most accessible and require a short but intense dissection in the fibrotic tissue of intersection. A paramedian perforator, medial to the rectus muscle, is a septocutaneous rather than a musculocutaneous perforator. The straightforward dissection almost extends up to the midline. Therefore, dissection always is performed at one side and, if no good perforators are present, continued at the intact contralateral side. The size of these perforators and their location in the flap determine the choice. One perforator with significant flow can perfuse the whole flap. If in doubt, two perforators can be harvested, especially if they show a linear anatomy so that muscle fibers can be split. The only interference with the muscle exists in splitting the muscle fibers. A perforator that lies in the middle of the flap is preferable. For a large flap, a perforator of the medial row provides better perfusion to zone 4 than one of the lateral row because of the extra choke vessel for the lateral row perforators. The clinical appearance of the perforators is the key element in the dissection of the perforator flap. Perforator topography determines the overall length and difficulty of the procedure.
BackgroundThe number of patients requesting autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) after mastectomy for breast cancer has increased over the past decades. However, concern has been expressed about the oncological safety of ABR. The aim of our study was to assess the effect of ABR on distant relapse.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, data was analysed from patients who underwent mastectomy for invasive breast cancer in University Hospitals Leuven between 2000 and 2011. In total, 2326 consecutive patients were included, 485 who underwent mastectomy with ABR and 1841 who underwent mastectomy alone. The risk of relapse in both groups was calculated using a Cox proportional hazards analysis, adjusted for established prognostic factors. ABR was considered as a time-dependent variable. Additionally, the evolution of the risk over follow-up time was calculated.ResultsWith a median follow-up of 68 months, 8% of patients in the reconstruction group developed distant metastases compared to 15% in the mastectomy alone group (univariate HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50–0.97, p = 0.0323). However, after adjustment for potential confounding factors in a Cox multivariable analysis, the risk of distant relapse was no longer significantly different between groups (multivariate HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.55–1.22, p = 0.3301). Moreover, the risk of metastasis after reconstruction was not time-dependent.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that there is no effect of ABR on distant relapse rate and thus that ABR is an oncological safe procedure. The rate of local recurrence was too low to make any significant conclusions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.