Pneumoendoscopic single port approach to breast cancer. How we do it?

Blay, Lidia; Pérez, Manel Cremades; López, J.; Miguel, Iciar Pascual; López, Cristina M.; Martínez, Alberto Pastor; Suárez, Montserrat Solà; Pujol, Andrea; Tomás, Miguel Ángel Luna; Ibáñez, Joan Francesc Julián

doi:10.1016/j.suronc.2019.10.017

Cited by 2 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies used insufflation 4,7,11,23,27,28,30–32,34,37,39 . In this review it was challenging to evaluate complications like subcutaneous emphysema, air embolism, hypothermia, and acid‐base imbalance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…30,32,50 Several studies used insufflation. 4,7,11,23,27,28,[30][31][32]34,37,39 In this review it was challenging to evaluate complications like subcutaneous emphysema, air embolism, hypothermia, and acid-base imbalance. Certainly, a decreased pulmonary venous flow, cardiac output, and respiratory compliance are unlikely due to the superficial (not intraabdominal or intrathoracic) nature of this procedure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Before reconstruction with EALDF, pneumoendoscopic-assisted mastectomies were reported in one study (n = 4), 34 and endoscopic-assisted mastectomies were reported in two studies (n = 169). 2,22 An open approach was used in the remaining oncologic procedures.…”

Section: Oncologic Surgery and Indication For Reconstructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The indications for an EALDF were breast reconstruction after lumpectomy (n = 46), 10,20,23 quadrantectomy (n = 58), 18,20,34,35 partial (n = 44) 2,4,19,31 or total mastectomy (n = 325), 11,17,22,24,26,[36][37][38] and Poland syndrome (n = 22) (Data S2). 25,28,29,33 42 patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy (range, 8.3%-100%), 2,10,20,22,34 one patient had neoadjuvant radiotherapy (3%), 10 325 received adjuvant radiotherapy (range, 6.4%-100%), 2,10,11,[17][18][19][20]22,26,31,35,36 and 20 had adjuvant chemotherapy (range, 40%-90.3%). 2,17,26,31,36 Before reconstruction with RALDFs, robotic-assisted mastectomies were performed in four studies.…”

Section: Oncologic Surgery and Indication For Reconstructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Primary reconstruction was the most common type of reconstruction. 4,10,11,18,20,22,23,25,31,34,38 A delayed single-stage reconstruction was reported in three studies. 26,35,37 As part of a 2-stage reconstruction, in five studies the EALDF was harvested during tissue expander (TE)-to-implant exchange 17,24,29,33,36 ; and in two studies during immediate TE placement.…”

Section: Ealdf Harvest Surgical Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Minimally invasive harvest of the latissimus dorsi flap for breast reconstruction: A systematic review

Escandón

Nazerali

Ciudad³

et al. 2022

Robotics Computer Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Poor cosmetic results with oncoplastic and implant‐based breast reconstruction have stimulated an interest in latissimus dorsi flap (LDF)‐based reconstruction. We reviewed the surgical techniques and outcomes of the LDF harvested with minimally invasive surgery. Methods A systematic search was conducted across PubMed‐MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid‐MEDLINE(R). Data on surgical outcomes were extracted. Results 31 articles were included reporting on 857 reconstructive procedures using a LDF harvested, 497 were endoscopic‐assisted LDF (EALDF) (58%) and 174 were robotic‐assisted LDF (RALDF) (20.3%). The average flap harvest time was 84.04‐min for EALDF and 106.14‐min for RALDF. With an EALDF, the incidence of haematoma, seroma, and wound dehiscence ranged between 0%–16.6%, 0%–48%, and 0%–6.2%, respectively. Using RALDF, the incidence of seroma was between 0%–26.1% and 0%–3.4% for haematoma. Conclusions While the indications for a LDF harvested with MIS are limited, its main advantage for breast reconstruction is the absence of the back scar.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%