Lateral chest wall perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction

2Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Breast conserving surgery (BCS) has been a standard procedure for the treatment of breast cancer instead of mastectomy whenever possible. Lateral chest wall perforator flaps are one of the volume replacement techniques that participate in increasing the rate of BCS especially in small- to moderate-sized breasts with good cosmetic outcome. In this study, we tried to evaluate the outcome of those flaps as an oncoplastic procedure instead of the conventional flaps. Methods: This study included 26 patients who underwent partial mastectomy with immediate reconstruction using lateral chest wall perforator flaps in the period from October 2019 to November 2020. The operative time, techniques, and complications were recorded. The cosmetic outcome was assessed 3 months post-radiation therapy through a questionnaire and photographic assessment. Results: Lateral intercostal artery perforator (LICAP), lateral thoracic artery perforator (LTAP) and combined flaps were performed in 24, 1, and 1 patients, respectively. The mean operative time was 129.6 ± 13.2 min. The flap length ranged from 10 to 20 cm and its width from 5 to 9 cm. Overall patients’ satisfaction was observed to be 88.5% as either excellent or good and the photographic assessment was 96.2% as either excellent or good. Conclusions: Lateral chest wall perforator flaps are reliable and safe option for partial breast reconstruction with an acceptable aesthetic outcome. In the era of oncoplastic breast surgery, they deserve to gain attention especially with the advantages of some modifications added to the classic technique.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Orabi, A., Youssef, M. M. G., Manie, T. M., Shaalan, M., & Hashem, T. (2022). Lateral chest wall perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction. Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute, 34(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43046-021-00100-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free