Outcome of 122 delayed breast reconstruction following post-mastectomy radiotherapy: The scarless latissimus dorsi flap with tissue expansion technique.

BACKGROUND: Delayed breast reconstruction with tissue expansion may be risky after radiotherapy, due to the poor skin quality. To permit the use of the tissue expansion procedure, we propose a scarless latissimus dorsi flap to bring tissue trophicity, by a healthy vascularized muscular interface with no donor scar and no patch effect. The objective of this study is to assess the outcome of the tissue expansion technique with scarless latissimus dorsi flap after post-mastectomy radiotherapy.

METHODS: All the patients who had benefited of a delayed breast reconstruction after radiotherapy using tissue expansion technique with scarless latissimus dorsi flap, between January 2000 and January 2013, were reviewed. The exclusion criteria were: prior breast reconstruction, or interruption of breast reconstruction procedure due to active metastatic disease requiring ongoing oncological treatment. The complications were identified: failures of reconstruction, implant exposure, wound dehiscence, capsular contracture, deflation of implant, hematoma, infection, and skin necrosis.

RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-two breasts were reviewed. The average time between the flap and the expander intervention was: 194±114 SD (28-1051) days. The mean volume of inserted expander was 633±111 SD (350-1100) mL and the mean inflation volume was 578±190 SD (170-1160) mL. The average time between insertion of the expander and insertion of the permanent implant was 132±76 SD (49-683) days. The mean inflation of the implant volume was 368±105 SD (130-620) mL. Forty patients developed at least one complication. The most common complication was the appearance of a capsular contracture requiring a capsulectomy: 11 (9.2%) with permanent implants and 6 (4.9%) with expander. Deflation of implants occurred with six permanent implants and with one expander. There were 3 breast reconstructions failures (two infections and one exposure of implants).

CONCLUSION: This procedure offers the advantages that there is no unattractive scar, and that there are low rates of exposure or failed reconstruction.