Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap.
ABSTRACT It is important for breast reconstruction after mastectomy to recreate immediately good breast symmetry with an adequate amount of soft tissue.
Eight patients with breast cancer underwent skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap. This operative technique, and the results, advantages, and disadvantages of the technique were assessed.
Seven patients had stage IIA disease, and one patient had stage I disease. An arc-shaped incision was made just at the lateral border of the breast in all patients. Three patients had a separate periareolar incision, and one had a circumferential nipple incision. There was 100% flap survival, and good breast symmetry was achieved in all patients. No major perioperative complications occurred in this series. A small amount of fat necrosis occurred in one flap. One patient had slight abdominal bulging. Minor wound-healing problems at the lateral breast skin envelope occurred in two patients.
These data indicate that skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with a DIEP flap is a reliable and safe technique. This method is a potentially useful surgical technique, which has achieved very promising results.
SourceAvailable from: Kefah Mokbel
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Aim: To provide an up-to-date review of the literature on skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) for breast cancer (BC). The article also reviews the oncological safety, effects of radiotherapy (RT) on immediate breast reconstruction (IBR), the indications for preserving the nipple-areola complex (NAC) and the emerging role of allogenic grafts as adjuncts to implant in IBR. Methods: Review of the English literature from 1965 to 2013 was carried out using Medline and PubMed research engines. Results: SSM is oncologically safe in appropriately selected cases of invasive breast cancer (IBC) and ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) including IBC < 5 cm, multi-centric tumours, DCIS and for risk-reduction surgery. Inflammatory breast cancer and tumours with extensive skin involvement represent contra-indications to SSM due to an unacceptable risk of local recurrence. Prior breast irradiation or the need for post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) do not preclude SSM with IBR, however the aesthetic outcome may be compromised by radiation. Preservation of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) has aesthetic and psychological benefits and is safe for peripherally located node negative unifocal tumours. An intraoperative frozen section protocol for the retro-areolar tissue should be performed when NAC preservation is considered. The advent of acellular dermal matrix has enhanced the scope of implant-based immediate reconstruction following SSM. Cell-assisted fat transfer is emerging as a promising technique to optimise the aesthetics outcome. There is no sufficient evidence to support the role of endoscopic mastectomy in clinical practice. Conclusion: Numerous retrospective and prospective studies show that SSM is oncolgically safe in appropriately selected cases and is aesthetically superior to non-SSM mastectomy. New tech-niques such as the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and cell-assisted fat transfer have increased the use of implants for volume replacement following SSM. In the absence of randomized clinical trials, an updated systematic meta-analysis of published studies is required in order to consolidate the evidence.