Hani Shash1,2,3, Becher Al-Halabi1, Salah Aldekhayel1, Tassos Dionisopoulos1. 1. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QuGill, Canada. 2. Department of Plastic Surgery, King Faisal University College of Medicine, Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. 3. Saudi Arabia Cultural Bureau, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence on the use of omental flaps for breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer is lacking, and no published reviews report an outcome-based assessment of such flap. This review explores available data and evidence for change in complication rates following the shift toward laparoscopic harvesting. METHODS: We searched the databases Excerpta Medica database, MEDLINE, and PubMed from inception until December 2015 using search terms "omental flaps" and "breast reconstruction." Data extracted were patient characteristics, technique used, and outcome measures reported and were then analyzed based on the technique of harvesting. RESULTS: Twenty-two articles reporting 651 patients who underwent mastectomies and breast-conserving surgeries were included in this review. Most flaps, 537 (82.5%), were harvested by laparoscopy, and 626 (96.2%) of the flaps were pedicle flaps. The mean age was 47.7 years (standard deviation: 4.29), and mean follow-up was 38.1 months. There were 88 reported complications among 562 patients in 16 reports. The rate of any complication was calculated to be 15.0%, with a higher rate (29.1%) occurring with the open technique in comparison to laparoscopy (12.6%). The commonest complications were postoperative infection and breast firmness each reported in 2.22%. Most authors reported advantages of malleability and excellent aesthetic outcomes and disadvantages in terms of inability to estimate the volume of the flap and variability in size. CONCLUSION: Omentum use is safe and has advantages in breast reconstruction where other options are limited including a natural feeling and minimal donor site morbidity if harvested laparoscopically.
BACKGROUND: Evidence on the use of omental flaps for breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer is lacking, and no published reviews report an outcome-based assessment of such flap. This review explores available data and evidence for change in complication rates following the shift toward laparoscopic harvesting. METHODS: We searched the databases Excerpta Medica database, MEDLINE, and PubMed from inception until December 2015 using search terms "omental flaps" and "breast reconstruction." Data extracted were patient characteristics, technique used, and outcome measures reported and were then analyzed based on the technique of harvesting. RESULTS: Twenty-two articles reporting 651 patients who underwent mastectomies and breast-conserving surgeries were included in this review. Most flaps, 537 (82.5%), were harvested by laparoscopy, and 626 (96.2%) of the flaps were pedicle flaps. The mean age was 47.7 years (standard deviation: 4.29), and mean follow-up was 38.1 months. There were 88 reported complications among 562 patients in 16 reports. The rate of any complication was calculated to be 15.0%, with a higher rate (29.1%) occurring with the open technique in comparison to laparoscopy (12.6%). The commonest complications were postoperative infection and breast firmness each reported in 2.22%. Most authors reported advantages of malleability and excellent aesthetic outcomes and disadvantages in terms of inability to estimate the volume of the flap and variability in size. CONCLUSION: Omentum use is safe and has advantages in breast reconstruction where other options are limited including a natural feeling and minimal donor site morbidity if harvested laparoscopically.
Entities:
Keywords:
breast cancer; breast reconstruction; mastectomy; omental flap; omentum