Immediate breast reconstruction is a safe and acceptable procedure after mastectomy for cancer; there is no evidence that it has untoward oncological consequences. In the appropriate patient it can be achieved effectively with either prosthetic or autogenous tissue reconstruction. Patient selection is important in order to optimize results, minimize complications and improve quality of life, while simultaneously treating the malignancy. Close cooperation and collaboration between the oncological breast and reconstructive surgeons is desirable in order to achieve these objectives.

No abstract

No abstract

Free-tissue transfer in the elderly has received increasing attention in the literature. Existing reports are limited by small samples or inadequate definition of the term elderly. This study reviewed 5 years' experience with free-tissue transfer in a geriatric population (mean age 75 years, range 70 to 83 years). Forty-nine free flaps were performed in 42 patients between 1986 and 1991. This review focuses on the 39 flaps undertaken in 33 head and neck cancer patients, the main indication being reconstruction after tumor resection (80 percent). In the head and neck cancer group, donor sites included the radial forearm (20), rectus abdominis (6), jejunum (5), and others (8). Thirty-four flaps (87 percent) were primarily successful. Reexploration was required in 10 patients (26 percent) for compromised flaps (5) and bleeding (5). Three of the compromised flaps were salvaged, giving an overall flap success rate of 95 percent. One patient (3 percent) died within 30 days of surgery. These results compare favorably with other published series in elderly patients, as well as with larger cohorts of younger subjects. Free flaps are safe in the elderly. Chronologic age alone should not be an exclusion criterion when selecting patients for free-tissue transfer.

In this series, neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not appear to increase the risk of major surgical complications following mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction or inordinately delay the institution of adjuvant radiotherapy.

Although various surgeons performed the reconstructive surgeries at 2 different centers, the essential approach remained the same. Smaller defects were best treated by local flaps, whereas the rectus abdominis flap remained the standard option for larger defects that additionally required closure of dead space. On the basis of our 2 center experience, we propose a simple algorithm to facilitate the planning of reconstructive surgery for the perineum.

IntroductionThe deep inferior epigastric artery perforator free flap is the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction. However, using a single vascular pedicle may not yield sufficient tissue in patients with midline scars or insufficient lower abdominal pannus. Double-pedicled free flaps overcome this problem using different vascular arrangements to harvest the entire lower abdominal flap. The literature is, however, sparse regarding technique selection. We therefore reviewed our experience in order to formulate an algorithm and comprehensive classification for this purpose.MethodsAll patients undergoing unilateral double-pedicled abdominal perforator free flap breast reconstruction (AFFBR) by a single surgeon (CMM) over 40 months were reviewed from a prospectively collected database.ResultsOf the 112 consecutive breast free flaps performed, 25 (22%) utilised two vascular pedicles. The mean patient age was 45 years (range = 27–54). All flaps, but one (which used the thoracodorsal system), were anastomosed to the internal mammary vessels using the rib-preservation technique. The surgical duration was 656 min (range = 468–690 min). The median flap weight was 618 g (range = 432–1275 g) and the mastectomy weight was 445 g (range = 220–896 g). All flaps were successful and only three patients requested minor liposuction to reduce and reshape their reconstructed breasts.ConclusionBipedicled free abdominal perforator flaps, employed in a fifth of all our AFFBRs, are a reliable and safe option for unilateral breast reconstruction. They, however, necessitate clear indications to justify the additional technical complexity and surgical duration. Our algorithm and comprehensive classification facilitate technique selection for the anastomotic permutations and successful execution of these operations.Levels of evidenceTherapeutic level IV.

No abstract