Neurotization Does not Prolong Operative Time in Free Flap Breast Reconstruction.
Autologous breast reconstruction
DIEP flap
Free flap
Nerve allograft
Neurotization
Operative time
Journal
Aesthetic plastic surgery
ISSN: 1432-5241
Titre abrégé: Aesthetic Plast Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7701756
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2022
10 2022
Historique:
received:
07
11
2021
accepted:
26
02
2022
pubmed:
31
3
2022
medline:
27
10
2022
entrez:
30
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Neurotization during the breast reconstruction process can improve patient quality-of-life and satisfaction with reconstructive outcomes. One concern with neurotization is increased total operative time due to the need for additional dissection and nerve coaptation. The purpose of this study was to compare total operative time between neurotized and non-neurotized abdominal-based, free flap breast reconstruction. A retrospective review was conducted of consecutive patients who underwent unilateral, abdominal-based, free flap breast reconstruction between 2016 and 2018 at a single tertiary care center. Data were collected on patient demographics, surgical techniques, and length of surgery. Data analysis was performed using chi-square test, independent t-test, and multivariate linear regression analysis. A p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Seventy-three patients were included in this study. Twenty-three patients (31.50%) underwent flap neurotization (N group) and 50 (68.49%) underwent standard breast reconstruction without neurotization (NO group). The groups were similar in age, BMI, smoking status, and ASA class. No difference was found between the two groups in timing of reconstruction (p = 0.388). Average operative times were 467.73 ± 145.52 minutes and 455.28 ± 111.19 minutes for the N and NO groups, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups (two-tailed p-value = 0.72). Seamless integration of neurotization in abdominal-based, free flap breast reconstruction is possible without significant prolongation of total operative time. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Neurotization during the breast reconstruction process can improve patient quality-of-life and satisfaction with reconstructive outcomes. One concern with neurotization is increased total operative time due to the need for additional dissection and nerve coaptation. The purpose of this study was to compare total operative time between neurotized and non-neurotized abdominal-based, free flap breast reconstruction.
METHODS
A retrospective review was conducted of consecutive patients who underwent unilateral, abdominal-based, free flap breast reconstruction between 2016 and 2018 at a single tertiary care center. Data were collected on patient demographics, surgical techniques, and length of surgery. Data analysis was performed using chi-square test, independent t-test, and multivariate linear regression analysis. A p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
Seventy-three patients were included in this study. Twenty-three patients (31.50%) underwent flap neurotization (N group) and 50 (68.49%) underwent standard breast reconstruction without neurotization (NO group). The groups were similar in age, BMI, smoking status, and ASA class. No difference was found between the two groups in timing of reconstruction (p = 0.388). Average operative times were 467.73 ± 145.52 minutes and 455.28 ± 111.19 minutes for the N and NO groups, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups (two-tailed p-value = 0.72).
CONCLUSION
Seamless integration of neurotization in abdominal-based, free flap breast reconstruction is possible without significant prolongation of total operative time.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 35352158
doi: 10.1007/s00266-022-02833-7
pii: 10.1007/s00266-022-02833-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2159-2163Informations de copyright
© 2022. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.
Références
Al-Ghazal SK, Fallowfield L, Blamey RW (2000) Comparison of psychological aspects and patient satisfaction following breast conserving surgery, simple mastectomy and breast reconstruction. Eur J Cancer 36:1938–1943
doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00197-0
Wilkins EG, Cederna PS, Lowery JC, Davis JA, Kim HM, Roth RS, Goldfarb S, Izenberg PH, Houin HP, Shaheen KW (2000) Prospective analysis of psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: one-year postoperative results from the michigan breast reconstruction outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg 106:1014–1025
doi: 10.1097/00006534-200010000-00010
Coombs DM, Djohan R, Knackstedt R, Cakmakoglu C, Schwarz GS (2020) Advances and current concepts in reconstructive surgery for breast cancer. Semin Oncol 47:217–221
doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2020.05.007
Knackstedt R, Grobmyer S, Djohan R (2019) Collaboration between the breast and plastic surgeon in restoring sensation after mastectomy. Breast J 25:1187–1191
doi: 10.1111/tbj.13420
Enajat M, Rozen WM, Audolfsson T, Acosta R (2009) Thermal injuries in the insensate deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap: case series and literature review on mechanisms of injury. Microsurgery 29:214–217
doi: 10.1002/micr.20601
Faulkner HR, Colwell AS, Liao EC, Winograd JM, Austen WG Jr (2016) Thermal injury to reconstructed breasts from commonly used warming devices. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 4:1033
doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001033
Lee CN, Hultman CS, Sepucha K (2010) What Are patientsʼ goals and concerns about breast reconstruction after mastectomy? Ann Plast Surg 64:567–569
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181bffc9b
Pusic AL, Matros E, Fine N, Buchel E, Gordillo GM, Hamill JB, Kim HM, Qi J, Albornoz C, Klassen AF, Wilkins EG (2017) Patient-reported outcomes 1 year after immediate breast reconstruction: results of the mastectomy reconstruction outcomes consortium study. J Clin Oncol 35:2499–2506
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.9561
Snell L, McCarthy C, Klassen A, Cano S, Rubin L, Hurley K, Montgomery GH, Cordeiro PG, Pusic A (2010) Clarifying the expectations of patients undergoing implant breast reconstruction: a qualitative study. Plast Reconstr Surg 126:1825–1830
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f44580
Roni CR (2017) After mastectomies, an unexpected blow: numb new breasts. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/well/live/after-mastectomies-an-unexpected-blow-numb-new-breasts.html?auth=login-google
Ducic I, Yoon J, Momeni A, Ascan U (2018) Anatomical considerations to optimize sensory recovery in breast neurotization with allograft. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 6:1–9
doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001985
Spiegel AJ, Menn ZK, Eldor L, Kaufman Y, Dellon AL (2013) Breast reinnervation: DIEP neurotization using the third anterior intercostal nerve. Plast Reconstr Surg 1:1–9
Cornelissen AJM, Beugels J, van Kuijk SMJ, Heuts EM, Rozen SM, Spiegel AJ, van der Hulst RRWJ, Tuinder SMH (2018) Sensation of the autologous reconstructed breast improves quality of life: a pilot study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 167:687–695
doi: 10.1007/s10549-017-4547-3
Temple CLF, Ross DC, Kim S, Tse R, Bettger-Hahn M, Gan BS, MacDermid J (2009) Sensibility following innervated free TRAM flap for breast reconstruction: part II. Innervation improves patient-rated quality of life. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:1419–1425
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181b98963
Weissler JM, Koltz PF, Carney MJ, Serletti JM, Wu LC (2018) Sifting through the evidence: a comprehensive review and analysis of neurotization in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 141:550–565
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004108
Santanelli F, Longo B, Angelini M, Laporta R, Paolini G (2011) Prospective computerized analyses of sensibility in breast reconstruction with non-reinnervated DIEP flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1790–1795
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31820cf1c6
Stromps JP, Bozkurt A, Grieb G, Kim BS, Wiezik M, Pallua N (2016) Spontaneous reinnervation of deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps after delayed breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 32:169–177
pubmed: 26372687
Slezak S, McGibbon B, Dellon AL (1992) The sensational transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap: return of sensibility after TRAM breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 28:210–217
doi: 10.1097/00000637-199203000-00004
Scomacao I, Duraes EFR, Knackstedt R, Mangan R, Schwarz G, Djohan R (2021) Sensory restoration in abdominally-based free flap for breast reconstruction using nerve allograft. Plast Reconstr Surg, In-press.
Isenberg JS (2002) Sense and sensibility: breast reconstruction with innervated TRAM flaps. J Reconstr Microsurg 18:023–028
doi: 10.1055/s-2002-19705
Blondeel PN (1999) The sensate free superior gluteal artery perforator (S-GAP) flap: a valuable alternative in autologous breast reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 52:185–193
doi: 10.1054/bjps.1998.3032
Yano K, Hosokawa K, Takagi S, Nakai K, Kubo T (2002) Breast reconstruction using the sensate latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:1897–1902
doi: 10.1097/00006534-200205000-00018
Yap LH, Whiten SC, Forster A, Stevenson HJ (2005) Sensory recovery in the sensate free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 115:1280–1288
doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000156988.78391.D6
Isenberg JS, Spinelli H (2004) Further experience with innervated autologous flaps in postoncologic breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 52:448–451
doi: 10.1097/01.sap.0000123481.47360.70
Puonti HK, Jääskeläinen SK, Hallikainen HK, Partanen TA (2011) A new approach to microneurovascular TRAM-flap breast reconstruction - a pilot study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 64:346–352
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2010.05.011
Tan MG, Isaranuwatchai W, DeLyzer T, Butler K, Hofer SOP, O’Neill AC, Zhong T (2019) A cost-effectiveness analysis of DIEP vs free MS-TRAM flap for microsurgical breast reconstruction. J Surg Oncol 119:388–396
doi: 10.1002/jso.25325
Means KR Jr, Rinker BD, Higgins JP, Payne SH Jr, Merrell GA, Wilgis EF (2016) A multicenter, prospective, randomized, pilot study of outcomes for digital nerve repair in the hand using hollow conduit compared with processed allograft nerve. Hand 11:144–151
doi: 10.1177/1558944715627233
Padubidri AN, Yetman R, Browne E, Lucas A, Papay F, Larive B, Zins J (2001) Complications of postmastectomy breast reconstructions in smokers, ex-smokers, and nonsmokers. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:342–349
doi: 10.1097/00006534-200102000-00007