Premium
Mini‐breast reconstruction with an omental flap: a retrospective clinical study
Author(s) -
Kim Hoon,
Yoon Chi Sun,
Lee Hoon Bum,
Ko Byung Kyun,
Kim Gyu Yeol,
Kim Kyu Nam
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
anz journal of surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.426
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-2197
pISSN - 1445-1433
DOI - 10.1111/ans.13701
Subject(s) - medicine , breast reconstruction , surgery , mastectomy , fat necrosis , implant , breast cancer , retrospective cohort study , radiation therapy , perforator flaps , cancer
Potential challenges associated with immediate small breast reconstruction include an inadequate size of the donor site, a thinner skin envelope and limited selection of implants. We present immediate postmastectomy reconstruction of small breasts with a laparoscopically harvested pedicled omental flap ( LHPOF ) in five Korean women. Methods From December 2014 to July 2015, we performed immediate postmastectomy reconstruction with an LHPOF in five breast cancer patients. Data on the patients’ age; body mass index; tumour size; site, type and weight of the mastectomy specimen; operative time; hospital stay; complications; postoperative chemotherapy or radiation therapy; and follow‐up duration were reviewed in this retrospective clinical study. Results The mean mastectomy specimen weight was 212 g (range: 104–272 g). The mean operative time was 298 min (range: 240–380 min), and the mean harvesting time was 75 min (range: 65–90 min). There were no flap‐related complications such as fat necrosis or flap loss and no donor site‐related complications such as bowel dysfunction, an epigastric bulge or hernia during the follow‐up period (average: 8.2 months, range: 5–11 months). The cosmetic results were satisfactory. Discussion The LHPOF can be useful for immediate postmastectomy reconstruction of small breasts, because it provides a soft and naturally ptotic appearance of the reconstructed breast (versus implant‐based reconstruction) with low donor‐site morbidity (versus other autologous tissue reconstruction approaches).