Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2017 / Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 3

Three-layer primary closure of the bipedicled TRAM flap donor site for unilateral breast reconstruction: a 15-year experience with 124 consecutive patients

Pages
861–867
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: The suturing technique studied provided abdominal wall closure without the use of a mesh even when utilizing a bilateral pedicle with very low complication rates.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: The pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap remains widely used as a breast reconstruction technique.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Between 2000 and 2015, 124 breast reconstruction patients were reviewed for donor site morbidity.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: The suturing technique studied provided abdominal wall closure without the use of a mesh even when utilizing a bilateral pedicle with very low complication rates.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background/aim: The pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap remains widely used as a breast reconstruction technique. The bipedicled TRAM flap is not as preferable as it was formerly, mainly because of its donor site complications. However, in a number of situations, a bipedicled TRAM flap may be the only alternative. Therefore, a three-layer primary closure technique used with bipedicled TRAM flap breast reconstructions that can avoid donor site complications without using a mesh is presented. Materials and methods: A retrospective study was performed that included patients who underwent bipedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction with the three-layer primary closure technique. Between 2000 and 2015, 124 breast reconstruction patients were reviewed for donor site morbidity. Results: During the 15-year study period, 106 patients had conventional bipedicled TRAM flaps and 18 had bipedicled TRAM flaps with a surgical delay procedure. For all groups, none of the patients developed abdominal wall hernia, but three patients had bulging. Partial flap loss was the most common flap complication, present in 6 flaps (4.8%). Conclusion: The suturing technique studied provided abdominal wall closure without the use of a mesh even when utilizing a bilateral pedicle with very low complication rates.

🔖

Cite This Article

YÜKSEL, F., EREN, F., KÜLAHÇI, Y., KARAGÖZ, H., CESUR, C., ŞAHİN, C., SEVER, C. (2022). Three-layer primary closure of the bipedicled TRAM flap donor site for unilateral breast reconstruction: a 15-year experience with 124 consecutive patients. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 3, 861–867. https://ajindex.com/articles/610503

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Schusterman MA, Kroll SS, Weldon ME. Immediate breast reconstruction: why the free TRAM over the conventional TRAM flap? Plast Reconstr Surg 1992; 90: 255-261
  2. Kroll SS, Coffey JA Jr, Winn RJ, Schusterman MA. A comparison of factors affecting aesthetic outcomes of TRAM flap breast reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 96: 860- 864
  3. Watterson PA, Bostwick J, Hester TR, Bried JT, Taylor GI. TRAM flap anatomy correlated with a 10-year clinical experience with 556 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 95: 1185
  4. Chun YS, Sinha I, Turko A, Lipsitz S, Pribaz JJ. Outcomes and patient satisfaction following breast reconstruction with bilateral pedicled TRAM flaps in 105 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 125: 1-9
  5. Serletti JM. Pedicle TRAM, free TRAM and perforator flaps. In: Guyuron B, Eriksson E, Persing JA, editors. Plastic Surgery: Indications and Practice. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Elsevier; 2009. pp. 247-259
  6. Bajaj AK, Chevray PM, Chang DW. Comparison of donor-site complications and functional outcomes in free muscle-sparing TRAM flap and free DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 117: 737-746
  7. Yüksel F, Çeliköz B. Double-pedicle TRAM flap breast reconstruction: following Bostwick’s principles. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2002; 26: 444-450
  8. Singletary SE. Skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Ann Surg Oncol 1996; 3: 411-416
  9. Hogge JP, Robinson RE, Magnant CM, Zuurbier RA. The mammographic spectrum of fat necrosis of the breast. Radiographics 1995; 15: 1347-1356
  10. Schusterman MA, Kroll SS, Miller MJ, Reece GP, Baldwin BJ, Robb GL, Altmyer CS, Ames FC, Singletary SE, Ross MI et al. The free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap for breast reconstruction: one center’s experience with 211 consecutive cases. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 32: 234-241
  11. Arnez ZM, Bajec J, Bardsley AF, Scamp T, Webster MH. Experience with 50 free TRAM flap breast reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg 1991; 87: 470-478
  12. Yüksel F, Şilit E, Çeliköz B. Reliance on double pedicle TRAM flap technique in breast reconstruction based on mammographic evidence. Indian J Plastic Surg 2004; 37: 44-50
  13. Carlson GW. Trends in autologous breast reconstruction. Semin Plast Surg 2004; 18: 79-87
  14. Bostwick J 3rd. Plastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery. St. Louis, MO, USA: Quality Medical Publishing; 2000
  15. Sværdborg M, Damsgaard TE. Donor-site morbidity afte