Sheina A Macadam1, Toni Zhong, Katie Weichman, Michael Papsdorf, Peter A Lennox, Alexes Hazen, Evan Matros, Joseph Disa, Babak Mehrara, Andrea L Pusic. 1. Vancouver, British Columbia, and Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and New York, N.Y. From the Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia; the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Health Network, University of Toronto; the Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Montefiore Medical Center; New York Medical Center, New York University; and the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 20 percent of women select autologous tissue for postmastectomy breast reconstruction, and most commonly choose the abdomen as the donor site. An increasing proportion of women are seeking muscle-sparing procedures, but the benefit remains controversial. It is therefore important to determine whether better outcomes are associated with these techniques, thereby justifying longer operative times and increased costs. METHODS: Patients from five North American centers were eligible if they underwent reconstruction by means of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap, muscle-sparing free transverse abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap, free TRAM flap, or the pedicled TRAM flap. Patients were sent the BREAST-Q. Demographics and complications were collected. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 1790 charts representing 670 DIEP, 293 muscle-sparing free TRAM, 683 pedicled TRAM, and 144 free TRAM patients with an average follow-up of 5.5 years. Flap loss did not differ by flap type. Partial flap loss was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP (p = 0.002). Fat necrosis was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM (p < 0.001). Hernia/bulge was highest in pedicled TRAM (p < 0.001). Physical well-being (abdomen) scores were higher in DIEP compared with pedicled TRAM controlling for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Complications and patient-reported outcomes differ when comparing abdominally based breast reconstruction techniques. The results of this study show that the DIEP flap was associated with the highest abdominal well-being and the lowest abdominal morbidity compared with the pedicled TRAM flap, but did not differ from muscle-sparing free TRAM and free TRAM flaps. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
BACKGROUND: Approximately 20 percent of women select autologous tissue for postmastectomy breast reconstruction, and most commonly choose the abdomen as the donor site. An increasing proportion of women are seeking muscle-sparing procedures, but the benefit remains controversial. It is therefore important to determine whether better outcomes are associated with these techniques, thereby justifying longer operative times and increased costs. METHODS:Patients from five North American centers were eligible if they underwent reconstruction by means of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap, muscle-sparing free transverse abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap, free TRAMflap, or the pedicled TRAMflap. Patients were sent the BREAST-Q. Demographics and complications were collected. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 1790 charts representing 670 DIEP, 293 muscle-sparing free TRAM, 683 pedicled TRAM, and 144 free TRAMpatients with an average follow-up of 5.5 years. Flap loss did not differ by flap type. Partial flap loss was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP (p = 0.002). Fat necrosis was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM (p < 0.001). Hernia/bulge was highest in pedicled TRAM (p < 0.001). Physical well-being (abdomen) scores were higher in DIEP compared with pedicled TRAM controlling for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Complications and patient-reported outcomes differ when comparing abdominally based breast reconstruction techniques. The results of this study show that the DIEPflap was associated with the highest abdominal well-being and the lowest abdominal morbidity compared with the pedicled TRAMflap, but did not differ from muscle-sparing free TRAM and free TRAM flaps. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
Authors: Yoon S Chun; Indranil Sinha; Arthur Turko; Janet H Yueh; Stuart Lipsitz; Julian J Pribaz; Bernard T Lee Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Patrick B Garvey; Edward W Buchel; Barbara A Pockaj; William J Casey; Richard J Gray; José L Hernández; Thomas D Samson Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Raj M Vyas; Brian P Dickinson; Jaco H Fastekjian; James P Watson; Andrew L DaLio; Christopher A Crisera Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Jonas A Nelson; Michael G Tecci; Michael A Lanni; John P Fischer; Joshua Fosnot; Jesse C Selber; Liza C Wu; Joseph M Serletti Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Andrea L Pusic; Evan Matros; Neil Fine; Edward Buchel; Gayle M Gordillo; Jennifer B Hamill; Hyungjin M Kim; Ji Qi; Claudia Albornoz; Anne F Klassen; Edwin G Wilkins Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-03-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jonas A Nelson; Nikhil Sobti; Aadit Patel; Evan Matros; Colleen M McCarthy; Joseph H Dayan; Joseph J Disa; Peter G Cordeiro; Babak J Mehrara; Andrea L Pusic; Robert J Allen Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-12-06 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Jessica Erdmann-Sager; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic; Ji Qi; Jennifer B Hamill; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Gretchen E Guldbrandsen; Yoon S Chun Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Hina Panchal; Meghana G Shamsunder; Avraham Sheinin; Clifford C Sheckter; Nicholas L Berlin; Jonas A Nelson; Robert Allen; David Rubin; Jeffrey H Kozlow; Evan Matros Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 5.169