scholarly journals A new indication and surgical procedure to reduce fat necrosis after breast-conserving surgery using an inframammary adipofascial flap

Author(s):  
Miyuko Yoshikawa ◽  
Makoto Ishitobi ◽  
Saori Matsuda ◽  
Mao Kimoto ◽  
Chihiro Higashi ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ehab M. Elzawawy ◽  
Melad N. Kelada ◽  
Ahmed F. Al Karmouty

Introduction. Submammary adipofascial flap (SMAF) is a valuable option for replacement of the inferior portion of the breast. It is particularly useful for reconstruction of partial mastectomy defects. It is also used to cover breast implants. Most surgeons base this flap cranially on the submammary skin crease, reflecting it back onto the breast. The blood vessels supplying this flap are not well defined, and the harvest of the flap may be compromised due to its uncertain vascularity. The aim of the work was to identify perforator vessels supplying SMAF and define their origin, site, diameter, and length. Materials and Methods. The flap was designed and dissected on both sides in 10 female cadavers. SMAF outline was 10 cm in length and 7 cm in width. The flap was raised carefully from below upwards to identify the perforator vessels supplying it from all directions. These vessels were counted and the following measurements were taken using Vernier caliper: diameter, total length, length inside the flap, and distance below the submammary skin crease. Conclusions. The perforators at the lateral part of the flap took origin from the lateral thoracic, thoracodorsal, and intercostal vessels. They were significantly larger, longer, and of multiple origins than those on the medial part of the flap and this suggests that laterally based flaps will have better blood supply, better viability, and more promising prognosis. Both approaches, medially based and laterally based SMAF, carry a better prognosis and lesser chance for future fat necrosis than the classical cranially based flap.


2013 ◽  
Vol 03 (01) ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
Yuko Kijima ◽  
Heiji Yoshinaka ◽  
Munetsugu Hirata ◽  
Akihiro Nakajo ◽  
Hideo Arima ◽  
...  

Breast Care ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 325-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross Dolan ◽  
Meera Patel ◽  
Eva Weiler-Mithoff ◽  
James Mansell ◽  
Sheila Stallard ◽  
...  

Background: Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) requires more complex surgical techniques than standard wide local excision (WLE) and the postoperative complication rate may be higher. Since these can have an impact on postoperative imaging, we compared imaging and biopsy results after OBCS and WLE. Methods: Findings for patients undergoing OBCS (n = 83) or standard WLE (n = 128) were compared. Numbers, indications and outcomes of mammograms, breast ultrasounds, magnetic resonance imaging scans and biopsies done within 2 years after surgery were analysed. Results: OBCS was applied for more advanced malignancy. Significantly more patients required breast ultrasound after OBCS than WLE (20/71 vs. 17/116; p = 0.024). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 3 or 4 ultrasound results were found only in patients with OBCS (6/29 vs. 0/19; p = 0.034). Significantly more biopsies were required after OBCS (9/71 vs. 3/116; p = 0.006). New lumps or lumpiness were the commonest indications, and pathology confirmed fat necrosis in the majority (7/12). The rate of fat necrosis after OBCS was 18% on clinical examination (13/71), 15% with ultrasound (11/71) and 7% confirmed on pathology (5/71). Conclusion: Patients treated with OBCS require significantly more ultrasound scans and consequent biopsies than patients who underwent WLE. This is mainly due to fat necrosis developing after OBCS in the majority of cases.


Breast Cancer ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 635-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomoko Ogawa ◽  
Noriko Hanamura ◽  
Masako Yamashita ◽  
Hiroko Kimura ◽  
Yumi Kashikura

Breast Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 567-572
Author(s):  
Hisamitsu Zaha ◽  
Tokiwa Motonari ◽  
Norie Abe ◽  
Mikiko Unesoko

Breast Cancer ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 409-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc D. Piroth ◽  
Karin Fischedick ◽  
Berthold Wein ◽  
Uwe Heindrichs ◽  
Daniela M. Piroth ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document