These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Optimizing Aesthetics in Reconstructive Breast Surgery Using Muscle-Sparing Latissimus Dorsi Flap in Radiated and Nonradiated Patients.
    Author: Gal S, Movassaghi K.
    Journal: Ann Plast Surg; 2022 Apr 01; 88(4):381-388. PubMed ID: 35312648.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap (LDMF) has been a workhorse for breast reconstruction. Its high rate of donor-site morbidity has led to the advent of the muscle-sparing latissimus dorsi flap (MSLDF). However, there are very limited reports using the MSLDF in irradiated patients. Prior studies of MSLDF have either precluded previously radiated patients from receiving MSLDF or have included them as part of their larger MSLSDF cohort without specifically analyzing their outcome as a separate group or comparing them to the traditional LDMF group. OBJECTIVE: We describe the technique and outcome of MSLDF in both radiated and nonradiated patients and compare the outcome to our LDMF patients. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients undergoing breast reconstruction between 2003 and 2020 using either a pedicled MSLDF or LDMF with a transverse skin paddle was conducted. All patients underwent a 2-stage reconstruction with the flap and tissue expander placement done during the first stage, and replacement with implant and, if needed, fat grafting to enhance soft tissue during the second stage. Complications, subjective functional morbidity, and aesthetic outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 35 MSLDFs and 40 LDMFs were performed: 24 MSLDFs (69%) and 25 LDMFs (63%) were inset into a previously irradiated field. There were 2 cases of infection requiring explantation in both MSLDF (8.3%) and LDMF (8.0%) radiated cohorts. There were no cases of donor-site seroma in the MSLDF cohorts versus 12 (30%) in the LDMF cohorts. Minor distal tip superficial epidermolysis was seen in 5 MSLDFs (14.3%), 3 of which were in the radiated cohort, and in 1 LDMF (2.5%) radiated cohort with no cases of flap loss. Functional and aesthetic outcomes were satisfactory. Four patients who had a unilateral MSLDF had a completion upper back lift. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest series to date demonstrating the use of the MSLDF in both nonradiated and radiated patients and comparing it to a standard LDMF for breast reconstruction by the same surgeon. The pedicled MSLDF is a versatile option for breast reconstruction in radiated patients, and radiation should not be considered a contraindication for its use.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]