scholarly journals Assessment of the abdominal wall function after pedicled TRAM flap surgery for breast reconstruction: Use of modified mesh repair for the donor defect

2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (02) ◽  
pp. 166-172
Author(s):  
Chacko Cyriac ◽  
Ramesh Kumar Sharma ◽  
Gurpreet Singh

ABSTRACT Background: The pedicled TRAM flap has been a workhorse of autologous breast reconstruction for decades. However, there has been a rising concern about the abdominal wall donor site morbidity with the use of conventional TRAM flap. This has generally been cited as one of the main reasons for resorting to “abdominal wall friendly” techniques. This study has been undertaken to assess the abdominal wall function in patients with pedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction. The entire width of the muscle and the overlying wide disk of anterior rectus sheath were harvested with the TRAM flap in all our patients and the anterior rectus sheath defect was repaired by a Proline mesh. Materials and Methods: Abdominal wall function was studied in 21 patients who underwent simultaneous primary unipedicled TRAM flap reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer. In all the patients, the abdominal wall defect was repaired using wide sheet of Proline mesh both as inlay and onlay. The assessment tools included straight and rotational curl ups and a subjective questionnaire. The abdominal wall was also examined for any asymmetry, bulge, or hernia. The minimal follow-up was 6 months postoperative. The objective results were compared with normal unoperated volunteers. Results and Conclusions: The harvesting the TRAM flap certainly results in changes to the anterior abdominal wall that can express themselves to a variable degree. A relatively high incidence of asymptomatic asymmetry of the abdomen was seen. There was total absence of hernia in our series even after a mean follow-up period of 15.5 months. A few patients were only able to partially initiate the sit up movement and suffered an important loss of strength. In most patients, synergists took over the functional movement but as the load increased, flexion and rotation performances decreased. The lack of correlation between exercise tests and the results of the questionnaire suggests that this statistically significant impairment was functionally not important. The patients encountered little or no difficulty in theis day-to-day activities. Our modification of use of a wide mesh as inlay and onlay repair minimizes the donor site morbidity. This also avoids maneuvers meant for primary closure of the rectus sheath defects, which can result in distortion of umbilicus. Therefore, in conclusion, the unipedicled TRAM flap should be regarded as a valuable option in breast reconstruction provided careful repair of the abdominal wall defect is undertaken using Proline mesh.

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hani Shash ◽  
Becher Al-halabi ◽  
Salah Aldekhayel ◽  
Tassos Dionisopoulos

Background: Evidence on the use of omental flaps for breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer is lacking, and no published reviews report an outcome-based assessment of such flap. This review explores available data and evidence for change in complication rates following the shift toward laparoscopic harvesting. Methods: We searched the databases Excerpta Medica database, MEDLINE, and PubMed from inception until December 2015 using search terms “omental flaps“ and “breast reconstruction.” Data extracted were patient characteristics, technique used, and outcome measures reported and were then analyzed based on the technique of harvesting. Results: Twenty-two articles reporting 651 patients who underwent mastectomies and breast-conserving surgeries were included in this review. Most flaps, 537 (82.5%), were harvested by laparoscopy, and 626 (96.2%) of the flaps were pedicle flaps. The mean age was 47.7 years (standard deviation: 4.29), and mean follow-up was 38.1 months. There were 88 reported complications among 562 patients in 16 reports. The rate of any complication was calculated to be 15.0%, with a higher rate (29.1%) occurring with the open technique in comparison to laparoscopy (12.6%). The commonest complications were postoperative infection and breast firmness each reported in 2.22%. Most authors reported advantages of malleability and excellent aesthetic outcomes and disadvantages in terms of inability to estimate the volume of the flap and variability in size. Conclusion: Omentum use is safe and has advantages in breast reconstruction where other options are limited including a natural feeling and minimal donor site morbidity if harvested laparoscopically.


Microsurgery ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 352-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas A. Nelson ◽  
John P. Fischer ◽  
Chen Yan ◽  
Joshua Fosnot ◽  
Jesse C. Selber ◽  
...  

Microsurgery ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 174-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heike Benditte-Klepetko ◽  
O. Sommer ◽  
R. Steinbach ◽  
H. Czembirek ◽  
M. Deutinger

2006 ◽  
Vol 118 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 102
Author(s):  
Liza C. Wu ◽  
Anureet Bajaj ◽  
David Woosuk Chang ◽  
Suyu Liu ◽  
Gregory D. Ayers ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document