41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reinforcement of peritoneal repair in donor site post-concurrent laparotomy and rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap breast reconstruction using autologous dermal graft repair from zone 4 of deep inferior epigastric perforator flap: A case series in Asian patients

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Sir, With the rising incidence of breast cancer, the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps have become a popular autologous tissue transfer option for breast reconstruction post-mastectomy. With the advent of prolene mesh reinforcement of abdominal wall repair techniques, donor site bulging and herniation have largely been eliminated; however, in specific clinical cases where there is weakening of the abdominal wall secondary to previous abdominal surgery or presence of tumours, which require excision, these complications may once again present.[1 2] Several techniques have been reported to reduce abdominal donor site morbidity, post-DIEP flap harvesting for breast reconstruction, including placement of synthetic or biologic meshes such as acellular dermal matrices.[3 4 5] We illustrate our reconstructive approach in three patients, highlighting a novel use of the dermal graft from zone 4 of the DIEP flap to reinforce abdominal wall repair and to act as an adjunct to the mesh repair. In two of these cases, the primary DIEP surgery was combined with a laparotomy, which is a complex situation. This is because any dehiscence of the peritoneal repair will result in gut spillage into the abdominal subcutaneous pocket. Moreover, the DIEP flap harvesting in itself causes a further skin shortage which may cause peritoneal wound breakdowns. Dehiscence of the abdominal wound would lead to an open abdomen and herniation of the bowel contents that would be catastrophic. A 47-year-old woman presented with right-sided breast cancer. A pre-operative computed-tomography (CT) scan demonstrated an incidental urachal cyst. She was noted to have a significant medical history of laparoscopic oophorectomy and a previous caesarean section. In view of the malignant potential of her urachal cyst, it was planned for excision in the same setting as the flap. A DIEP flap was performed and zone 4 was planned to be discarded. Following the excision of the urachal cyst via a midline incision, a peritoneal defect remained which was repaired primarily posteriorly and reinforced with a dermal graft sublay technique, harvested from zone 4 of the flap, anchored with prolene 2/0. The dermal graft was positioned with dermis facing up and fat facing down towards the intraabdominal contents to decrease risk of adhesions. This is an autologous repair technique which can be performed in the same sitting without additional costs, unlike using a foreign mesh material such as Omyra[6] or double-layered non-adhesive prolene meshes. A 58-year-old woman presented with right-sided breast cancer and underwent a mastectomy with DIEP flap reconstruction. During the process of raising the flap, inadvertent breach of the peritoneal wall occurred due to adhesions that had formed secondary to a caesarean section which patient had previously undergone. The risk of such a breach is that bowel may herniate laterally and get trapped between prolene mesh if it is used for repair and posterior sheath and cause bowel ischemia. Hence, the peritoneal defect was repaired primarily and overlay technique reinforcement with dermal graft harvested from zone 4 of the flap was performed [Figures 1 and 2]. Figure 1 Dermal graft inset with prolene mesh overlying Figure 2 Dermal graft and prolene mesh inset A 41-year-old woman presented with left breast cancer post-mastectomy for DIEP reconstruction. She had a significant history of hormonal therapy for the breast cancer, a left 5 cm endometriotic cyst and raising cancer antigen 125 trends, hence was also planned for total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophrectomy in the same seating. Following the raising of the DIEP flap, a paramedian incision was performed to access the uterus and ovaries. In view of the large size of the peritoneal defect, a combination reinforcement technique was adopted in this case. The dermal graft harvested from zone 4 of the DIEP flap was laid over the inferior peritoneal incision and secured with prolene 2/0. A prolene mesh was then laid over the peritoneal repair and the rectus sheath was double breasted [Figures 3 and 4]. Figure 3 Double-breasting of the fascia Figure 4 Computed tomography post-repair with dermal graft and prolene mesh inset Therefore, we report three cases of peritoneal defect repair prolene reinforcement with autologous dermal graft [Figures 1–3]. The dermal graft serves to reinforce the primary peritoneal repair, which may be flimsy and prone to tearing and in the event of peritoneal dehiscence allows the gut to be contained by the dermal graft. This prevents direct contact of the gut with the overlying mesh. It allows for subsequent repair and closure of the abdomen with negative pressure dressing therapy as the bowel is contained. It avoids the complications associated with only repairing the sheath with a mesh risking bowel being abraded by mesh used for fascial repair if it herniates through weakened peritoneal lining or secondary peritoneal defect. The autologous dermal graft onlay technique reduces the risk of post-operative ventral hernias by reinforcing primary peritoneal repair. Other options are acellular dermal matrices and alloplastic procide. Our autologous dermal graft is a form of matrix, which has many potential uses yet to be explored. It is harvested from tissue that would otherwise be discarded in the DIEP flap and is a safe option, which incurs no additional costs to the patient and provides a heretofore untold benefit to the patient. In our series of three patients, no abdominal wall weakness in the flap donor site was identified following a series of clinical examinations for at least 12 months after autologous dermal graft reinforcement of peritoneal wall defect. A well-formed and thickened fascial layer at the abdominal donor fascial repair site was revealed on follow-up by CT scans [Figure 4]. This objective finding, along with our clinical observation, supports the use of dermal graft for repair of the abdominal donor site peritoneal defect following flap harvesting. In conclusion, our two-layered technique of repair prevents abdominal complications and is safe, by preventing direct contact of the mesh with intra-abdominal contents and is cost effective as we are using a segment of the DIEP flap which would otherwise usually be discarded. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Breast Reconstruction with the free TRAM or DIEP flap: patient selection, choice of flap, and outcome.

          Recent reports of breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap indicate increased fat necrosis and venous congestion as compared with the free transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flap. Although the benefits of the DIEP flap regarding the abdominal wall are well documented, its reconstructive advantage remains uncertain. The main objective of this study was to address selection criteria for the free TRAM and DIEP flaps on the basis of patient characteristics and vascular anatomy of the flap that might minimize flap morbidity. A total of 163 free TRAM or DIEP flap breast reconstructions were performed on 135 women between 1997 and 2000. Four levels of muscle sparing related to the rectus abdominis muscle were used. The free TRAM flap was performed on 118 women, of whom 93 were unilateral and 25 were bilateral, totaling 143 flaps. The DIEP flap procedure was performed on 17 women, of whom 14 were unilateral and three were bilateral, totaling 20 flaps. Morbidities related to the 143 free TRAM flaps included return to the operating room for 11 flaps (7.7 percent), total necrosis in five flaps (3.5 percent), mild fat necrosis in 14 flaps (9.8 percent), mild venous congestion in two flaps (1.4 percent), and lower abdominal bulge in eight women (6.8 percent). Partial flap necrosis did not occur. Morbidities related to the 20 DIEP flaps included return to the operating room for three flaps (15 percent), total necrosis in one flap (5 percent), and mild fat necrosis in two flaps (10 percent). Partial flap necrosis, venous congestion, and a lower abdominal bulge were not observed. Selection of the free TRAM or DIEP flap should be made on the basis of patient weight, quantity of abdominal fat, and breast volume requirement, and on the number, caliber, and location of the perforating vessels. Occurrence of venous congestion and total flap loss in the free TRAM and DIEP flaps appears to be independent of the patient age, weight, degree of muscle sparing, and tobacco use. The occurrence of fat necrosis is related to patient weight (p < 0.001) but not related to patient age or preservation of the rectus abdominis muscle. The ability to perform a sit-up is related to patient weight (p < 0.001) and patient age (p < 0.001) but not related to preservation of the muscle or intercostal nerves. The incidence of lower abdominal bulge is reduced after DIEP flap reconstruction (p < 0.001). The DIEP flap can be an excellent option for properly selected women.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Abdominal wall strength, bulging, and hernia after TRAM flap breast reconstruction.

            The incidence of postoperative abdominal bulge, hernia, and the ability to do sit-ups was reviewed in a series of 268 patients who had undergone free TRAM (FTRAM) or conventional TRAM (CTRAM) flap breast reconstruction. Minimum follow-up was 6 months. Patients were divided into four groups: unilateral FTRAM (FT1P; n = 123), double-pedicle bilateral FTRAM (FT2P; n = 45), single-pedicle CTRAM (CT1P; n = 40), and double-pedicle or bilateral CTRAM (CT2P; n = 60). The incidence of abdominal bulges (3.8 percent) and hernia (2.6 percent) was similar in the four groups. Synthetic mesh, however, was required for reinforcement of donor site closure twice as often in the CTRAM patients. The ability to perform sit-ups was greatest in the FT1P group (63.0 percent), slightly lower in the CT1P group (57.1 percent), still lower in the FT2P group (46.2 percent), and lowest in the CT2P group (27.1 percent; p = 0.0005). Patients reconstructed with an FTRAM flap were more likely to be able to do sit-ups (58.3 percent) than were those reconstructed with a CTRAM flap (38.2 percent; p = 0.0074). Patients who had only one muscle pedicle used were more likely to be able to do sit-ups (61.7 percent) than were those who had two muscle pedicles used (35.6 percent; p = 0.0003). We conclude that the incidence of abdominal bulge or hernia is relatively independent of the type of TRAM flap used and the number of muscle pedicles harvested. On the other hand, postoperative abdominal strength, as measured by the ability do sit-ups, is influenced significantly by both of these factors.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hernia prevention and aesthetic contouring of the abdomen following TRAM flap breast reconstruction by the use of polypropylene mesh.

              The value of synthetic mesh use in the treatment of recurrent abdominal hernias is well recognized and has led to its advocacy by some authors as an adjunct in primary hernia repair. Mesh use in the donor-site closure associated with TRAM flap reconstruction is typically restricted to situations where undue tension or questionable tissue integrity may be predisposing factors to herniation. Although more liberal use of mesh has been advocated for these circumstances, fear of mesh complications may continue to restrict its use. We present a series of 65 consecutive patients who had routine mesh application to fascial closures following TRAM flap breast reconstruction. The use of mesh provides an added margin of strength to fascial reconstruction and was found to have additional benefit as a technical adjunct to the aesthetic aspects of the abdominoplasty. Mean patient follow-up was 56.4 months. The resulting rates of hernia (1.5 percent) and mesh-related infection (1.5 percent) demonstrate its considerable safety. We recommend consideration of polypropylene mesh use for improved strength and aesthetic quality of the donor-site closure following TRAM flap breast reconstruction.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Indian J Plast Surg
                Indian J Plast Surg
                IJPS
                Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery : Official Publication of the Association of Plastic Surgeons of India
                Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd (India )
                0970-0358
                1998-376X
                Jan-Apr 2016
                : 49
                : 1
                : 119-121
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetics Surgery, National University Health System, Singapore
                [2 ]Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetics Surgery, General Hospital, Singapore
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence: Dr. Bien-Keem Tan, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road, Singapore 169608. E-mail: bienkeem@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                IJPS-49-119
                10.4103/0970-0358.182237
                4878228
                27274136
                d0a2bc01-c074-4932-b586-52b5ccac6ed3
                Copyright: © Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

                History
                Categories
                Letters to Editor

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article