Paper Tape May Improve Scar Aesthetics and Prevent Wound Closure Complications.

There is uncertainty whether postoperative application of paper tape (PT) improves scar aesthetics and reduces wound closure complications. This study aimed to review and assess the quality of applicable findings from studies investigating PT's efficacy. We queried PubMed and SCOPUS using the search terms "(("paper tape") AND (wound OR closure OR heal* OR complication OR skin OR prevent* OR scar*))." We excluded articles that were duplicates, basic science, or not clinically relevant. We assessed the level of evidence for each article using the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) Rating Levels of Evidence and Grading Recommendations for Therapeutic Studies, ranging from I (highest) to V (lowest). Of 186 publications reviewed, we included eight studies in the literature review. Five of these studies reported statistically significant positive outcomes on scar aesthetics and wound closure associated with using PT. Using the ASPS rating system, we found that two studies were Level I, three studies were Level II, two studies were Level IV, and one study was Level V. Notably, heterogeneity in the study designs limited outcome comparison. The data from the studies included in this literature review support using PT to optimize scar and wound management. The lack of higher levels of evidence, however, suggests the need for additional randomized controlled trials to rigorously evaluate patient outcomes when using PT compared with other forms of adhesive dressings.

Relationship between Body Mass Index and Outcomes in Microvascular Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Increasing body mass index (BMI) is a known risk factor for autologous microsurgical breast reconstruction. No prior studies have stratified outcomes across BMI ranges or defined the BMI at which complication rates dramatically increase. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent abdominally based autologous free flap breast reconstruction at their institution between 2004 and 2021. Clinical, surgical, and outcomes data were collected. Patients were stratified into five BMI categories: 25, 25.01 to 30, 30.01 to 35, 35.01 to 40, and greater than 40 kg/m 2 . Complication rates were analyzed across these groups, and a receiver-operating characteristic analysis was used to determine an optimal BMI cutoff point. RESULTS: A total of 365 patients (545 breasts) were included in this study. The rates of several breast complications significantly increased with increasing BMI at distinct levels, including any breast complication (BMI >30 kg/m 2 ), unplanned reoperation (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ), fat necrosis (BMI >40 kg/m 2 ), wound breakdown requiring re-operation (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ), any infection (BMI >30 kg/m 2 ), infection requiring oral antibiotics (BMI >25 kg/m 2 ), infection requiring intravenous antibiotics (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ), and mastectomy flap necrosis (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ). The rates of many abdominal complications significantly increased with increasing BMI at distinct levels as well, including delayed wound healing (BMI >30 kg/m 2 ), wound breakdown requiring re-operation (BMI >40 kg/m 2 ), any infection (BMI >25 kg/m 2 ), and infection requiring oral antibiotics (BMI >25 kg/m 2 ). Optimal BMI cutoffs of 32.7 and 30.0 kg/m 2 were determined to minimize the occurrence of any breast complication and any abdomen complication, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative weight loss has great potential to alleviate surgical risk in overweight and obese patients pursuing autologous breast reconstruction. The authors' results quantify the risk reduction based on a patient's preoperative BMI. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.

Immediate Versus Delayed-Immediate Autologous Breast Reconstruction After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Autologous reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is either performed in a delayed-immediate fashion, with a tissue expander placed initially at the time of mastectomy and autologous reconstruction performed later, or immediately at the time of NSM. It has not been determined which method of reconstruction leads to more favorable patient outcomes and lower complication rates. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent autologous abdomen-based free flap breast reconstruction after NSM between January 2004 and September 2021. Patients were stratified into 2 groups by timing of reconstruction (immediate and delayed-immediate). All surgical complications were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred one patients (151 breasts) underwent NSM followed by autologous abdomen-based free flap breast reconstruction during the defined time period. Fifty-nine patients (89 breasts) underwent immediate reconstruction, whereas 42 patients (62 breasts) underwent delayed-immediate reconstruction. Considering only the autologous stage of reconstruction in both groups, the immediate reconstruction group experienced significantly more delayed wound healing, wounds requiring reoperation, mastectomy skin flap necrosis, and nipple-areolar complex necrosis. Analysis of cumulative complications from all reconstructive surgeries revealed that the immediate reconstruction group still experienced significantly greater cumulative rates of mastectomy skin flap necrosis. However, the delayed-immediate reconstruction group experienced significantly greater cumulative rates of readmission, any infection, infection requiring PO antibiotics, and infection requiring IV antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate autologous breast reconstruction after NSM alleviates many issues seen with tissue expanders and delayed autologous reconstruction. Although mastectomy skin flap necrosis occurs at a significantly greater rate after immediate autologous reconstruction, it can often be managed conservatively.

Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has gained popularity due to numerous benefits in properly selected patients. Compared with subpectoral implant reconstruction, prepectoral reconstruction offers preservation of the pectoralis major muscle in its native position, resulting in decreased pain, no animation deformity, and improved arm range of motion/strength. Although prepectoral reconstruction is safe and effective, the implant sits closer to the mastectomy skin flap. Acellular dermal matrices play a critical role, allowing for precise control of the breast envelope and providing long-term implant support. Careful patient selection and intraoperative mastectomy flap evaluation are critical to obtaining optimal results with prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Long-Term Outcomes in Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based breast reconstruction remains the most often used method following mastectomy, but data are lacking regarding differences in complications and long-term patient-reported outcomes for two-stage subpectoral versus prepectoral reconstruction. This study sought to better understand the risks and impact of these reconstructive approaches on overall satisfaction. METHODS: Patients who underwent unilateral or bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy and two-stage implant-based reconstruction from 2014 to 2019 were identified from the electronic medical records and contacted via email to complete the BREAST-Q survey. Overall satisfaction was measured by the question, "How happy are you with the outcome of your breast reconstruction?" using a six-point Likert scale. Patients were grouped into subpectoral or prepectoral cohorts. Complications were evaluated retrospectively. Only patients who were at least 6 months from their final reconstruction were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 582 patients contacted, 206 (35%) responded. The subpectoral ( n = 114) and prepectoral ( n = 38) groups did not differ significantly by demographic or treatment characteristics. BREAST-Q scores were also comparable. Complication rates were similar, but prepectoral patients had a significantly higher rate of capsular contracture (16% versus 4%, P < 0.05). Bivariate ordered logistic regression identified prepectoral implant placement, having any postoperative complication, and capsular contracture as predictors of less overall happiness. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' study suggests that prepectoral patients may have slightly higher complication rates but are as satisfied as subpectoral patients after at least a year of follow-up. Further studies should investigate risk factors for capsular contracture, how the risk changes over time, and how the risk affects patient satisfaction.

Safety of Incision Placement with Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

In nipple-sparing mastectomy, adequate perfusion to the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) during reconstruction is paramount to avoiding unwanted outcomes. Previous studies have suggested that periareolar incisions may result in higher rates of NAC complications. However, studies to date have not specifically investigated this in prepectoral reconstruction. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of incision location on NAC complications in patients undergoing prepectoral breast reconstruction. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent immediate two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy between 2015 and 2018 at a single institution. We identified two types of incisions utilized: superior periareolar or inframammary fold (IMF). Patient demographics, comorbidities, and surgical details were compared between incision types, as were NAC complications. Results: A total of 181 consecutive prepectoral breast reconstructions were included for analysis. A superior periareolar incision was used in 113 reconstructions (62%), and an IMF incision was used in 68 reconstructions (38%). There were 33 (18%) total NAC complications in our series. The periareolar incision group had a higher rate of any NAC complication (25% versus 7.4%; P < 0.01), as well as a higher rate of nipple necrosis requiring debridement (9.7% versus 1.5%; P = 0.03). Conclusions: In patients undergoing immediate two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy, periareolar incisions are associated with an increased risk of NAC complications compared with IMF incisions. For patients who are candidates for either an IMF or periareolar incision, a periareolar incision should be avoided.

Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Reduces Opioid Consumption and Pain After Mastectomy: A Head-to-Head Comparison With Submuscular Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Acute pain after mastectomy is increased with concurrent breast reconstruction. One postulated advantage of prepectoral breast reconstruction is less postoperative pain; however, no comparisons to partial submuscular reconstruction have been made to date. Here, we examined the postoperative pain experienced between patients with prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders from 2012 to 2019 by a single plastic surgeon. Patient demographics, surgical details, and anesthetic techniques were evaluated, and our primary outcome compared postoperative opioid usage between prepectoral and subpectoral reconstructions. Our secondary outcome compared pain scores between techniques. RESULTS: A total of 211 subpectoral and 117 prepectoral reconstruction patients were included for analysis. Patients with subpectoral reconstructions had higher postoperative opioid usage (80.0 vs 45.0 oral morphine equivalents, P < 0.001). Subpectoral patients also recorded higher maximum pain scores compared with prepectoral reconstructions while admitted (7 of 10 vs 5 of 10, P < 0.004). Multivariable linear regression suggests that mastectomy type and subpectoral reconstruction were significant contributors to postoperative opioid use (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Prepectoral breast reconstruction was associated with less postoperative opioid consumption and lower postoperative pain scores as compared with subpectoral reconstruction, when controlling for other surgical and anesthesia factors. Future randomized controlled trials are warranted to study how postoperative pain and chronic pain are influenced by the location of prosthesis placement in implant-based postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

Prepectoral implant reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy radiation.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomy is a more commonly performed technique in recent years due to its numerous advantages over subpectoral breast reconstruction. This study reviews the current state of clinical outcomes for patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) after prepectoral breast reconstruction. A comprehensive search of the literature was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify all relevant studies. Outcome measures included demographics, mean follow-up, and complication measures. Three studies for a total of 175 breasts were identified. Average age was 49.3 years and BMI was 27.7 kg/m2. Mean follow up was 18.1 months. A total of 3 (1.7%) hematomas and 4 (2%) seromas were reported. Surgical site infection was the most common complication reported with an overall reported 32 breasts with infections (18%). A total of 9 (5.1%) cases of wound dehiscence were reported. Mastectomy flap necrosis was found in 10 (5.7%) breasts. A total of 22 (12.6%) tissue expanders or implants required explantation. The review of the literature suggests that prepectoral breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrices in the setting of post mastectomy radiation therapy is a safe and successful surgical option resulting in excellent clinical outcomes. Furthermore, there may be a reduction of capsular contracture and implant migration in this setting, relative to traditional submuscular techniques with PMRT.

Preventing Recurrence in Clean and Contaminated Hernias Using Biologic Versus Synthetic Mesh in Ventral Hernia Repair: The PRICE Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate which mesh type yields lower recurrence and complication rates after ventral hernia repair. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: More than 400,000 ventral hernia repairs are performed annually in the United States. Although the most effective method for repairing ventral hernias involves using mesh, whether to use biologic mesh versus synthetic mesh is controversial. METHODS: Single-blind, randomized, controlled, pragmatic clinical trial conducted from March 2014 through October 2018; 165 patients enrolled with an average follow up of 26 months. Patients were randomized 1:1 to have their ventral hernias repaired using either a biologic (porcine) or synthetic (polypropylene) mesh. The primary study outcome measure was hernia recurrence at 2 years. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients (68 men), mean age 55 years, were included in the study with a mean follow-up of 26 months. An intention-to-treat analysis noted that hernias recurred in 25 patients (39.7%) assigned to biologic mesh and in 14 patients (21.9%) assigned to synthetic mesh (P = 0.035) at 2 years. Subgroup analysis identified an increased rate of hernia recurrence in the biologic versus the synthetic mesh group under contaminated wound conditions (50.0% vs 5.9%; P for interaction = 0.041). Postoperative complication rates were similar for the 2 mesh types. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of hernia recurrence was significantly higher for patients undergoing ventral hernia repair with biologic mesh compared to synthetic mesh, with similar rates of postoperative complications. These data indicate that the use of synthetic mesh over biologic mesh to repair ventral hernias is effective and can be endorsed, including under contaminated wound conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02041494.

Utility of Postoperative Prophylactic Antibiotics in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Surgeon Experience.

BACKGROUND: Immediate tissue expander placement remains a preferred method for breast reconstruction after mastectomy. The use of prophylactic postoperative antibiotic administration is thought to reduce rates of surgical site infection and reconstructive failure, but has not been studied in patients undergoing reconstruction in the prepectoral plane. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients undergoing immediate prepectoral tissue expander placement after mastectomy by a single plastic surgeon from 2015 to 2018. We identified 2 cohorts of patients: one group that received prophylactic antibiotics at the time of discharge and one group that did not. We collected treatment and outcomes data to compare rates of postoperative complications between cohorts. RESULTS: We identified 69 patients with 115 breasts who received discharge antibiotics and 63 patients with 106 breasts who did not. The antibiotic cohort had significantly lower rates of tissue expander loss (4.3% vs 17.0%, P = 0.003), unplanned operation (10.4% vs 24.5%, P = 0.007), and infection (7.0% vs 24.5, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of prophylactic postoperative antibiotics in prepectoral breast reconstruction is associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative complications. Further randomized controlled studies are warranted to explore the effect of antibiotic therapy on outcomes and to determine what the optimal duration of antibiotic therapy may be.

How to Optimize Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has become a popular method of postmastectomy breast reconstruction due to its numerous benefits in properly selected patients. Prepectoral reconstruction, as compared with retropectoral position, offers the advantage of leaving the pectoralis muscle undisturbed and in its original anatomic position, resulting in significantly decreased acute and chronic pain, improved upper extremity strength and range of motion, and avoidance of animation deformity. The use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) allows for precise control of the breast pocket, resulting in aesthetic outcomes and high patient satisfaction. ADMs have the added benefit of reducing capsular contracture, especially in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy. Although prepectoral breast reconstruction is effective, the breast implant is placed closer to the skin flap with less vascularized soft tissue coverage. Therefore, optimizing outcomes in prepectoral breast reconstruction requires careful patient selection, intraoperative mastectomy flap evaluation, and perioperative surgical algorithms specific to prepectoral reconstruction.

Oncoplastic Procedures in Preparation for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Controlling the Breast Envelope.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy has been associated with superior aesthetic outcomes and oncologic safety. However, traditional contraindications, such as breast ptosis/macromastia, have excluded a large number of patients. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a staged approach would expand the indications for nipple-areolar complex preservation and permit greater control over nipple-areolar complex position and skin envelope following autologous reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of female patients with a diagnosis of breast cancer or BRCA mutation with grade 2 or 3 ptosis and/or macromastia who underwent bilateral (oncoplastic) reduction/mastopexy (stage 1) followed by bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with free abdominal flaps (stage 2). The authors were specifically interested in the incidence of mastectomy skin necrosis and nipple-areolar complex necrosis and malposition following stage 2. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients with a mean age of 45.1 years (range, 28 to 62 years) and mean body mass index of 32.6 kg/m (range, 23.4 to 49.0 kg/m) underwent reconstruction with 122 flaps. The mean interval between stage 1 and 2 was 16.9 weeks (range, 3 to 31 weeks). Clear margins were obtained in all cases of invasive cancer and in situ disease following stage 1. Complications following stage 2 included partial nipple-areolar complex necrosis (n = 5, 8.2 percent), complete nipple-areolar complex necrosis (n = 4, 6.6 percent), nipple-areolar complex malposition (n = 1, 1.6 percent), and mastectomy skin necrosis (n = 4, 6.6 percent). No flap loss was noted in this series. CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate to severe breast ptosis and/or macromastia who wish to undergo mastectomy with reconstruction can be offered nipple-sparing approaches safely if a staged algorithm is implemented. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Surgical Correction of Breast Animation Deformity with Implant Pocket Conversion to a Prepectoral Plane.

BACKGROUND: Animation deformity is an undesirable outcome of subpectoral breast reconstruction that results in abnormal breast contraction with activity, breast pain, and increased implant visibility. Surgical correction requires implant removal and conversion of the reconstruction to a prepectoral plane. The authors present their institutional experience with their preferred surgical technique to treat this challenging problem and outline solutions for increased success in these patients. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all patients undergoing conversion of their subpectoral breast reconstruction to a prepectoral plane at the authors' institution. Patient demographics and surgical details were analyzed, and postoperative outcomes and morbidity were assessed. The effects of changing operative strategies on enhanced success are also reported. RESULTS: A total of 80 breast conversions were performed over a 2.5-year period. All patients demonstrated resolution of animation deformity at a mean follow-up of 15.2 months. Two reconstructions (2.5 percent) required an unplanned return to the operating room, and 11 reconstructions (13.8 percent) were treated for infection. Preconversion fat grafting and the use of acellular dermal matrix were both associated with a reduced incidence of postoperative asymmetry and capsular contracture (p < 0.05). There were no reconstructive failures associated with conversion to a prepectoral pocket. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of animation deformity in the reconstructed patient can be safely performed by surgical conversion to a prepectoral plane. The use of acellular dermal matrix, and preconversion fat grafting, in appropriate patients can improve results. The authors promote this operative algorithm for all reconstructive patients experiencing symptomatic animation deformity with subpectoral breast reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Breast Reconstruction Does Not Increase the Incidence of Postmastectomy Pain Syndrome: Results of a Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postmastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS) is characterized by neuropathic pain from direct nerve injury during oncologic breast surgery causing chronic pain, often leading to chronic opioid dependence and long-term disability. To our knowledge, this study represents the first meta-analysis that defines the incidence of PMPS in patients undergoing mastectomy, with and without breast reconstruction. METHODS: The Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases were queried. A total of 166 citations from 1991 to 2017 were reviewed to identify 22 unique manuscripts. Inclusion criteria required: (i) minimum 3-month follow-up, (ii) pain in breast, (iii) pain after mastectomy, (iv) documentation of any reconstruction, and (v) minimum of level three evidence. Comprehensive Meta- Analysis Software and Microsoft Excel were used for statistical calculations. RESULTS: Sixteen manuscripts described the prevalence of postmastectomy pain and 11 described the prevalence of postreconstruction pain (5 had data for both). Study population size ranged from 32 to 1165 patients. All studies were classified as level 2 or level 3 evidence. The mean prevalence of pain after mastectomy alone using a random-effects model is 35.6% (30.3%-41.3%). Mean prevalence of pain after mastectomy with reconstruction using the random-effects model is 32.8% (24.4% - 42.5%). Analysis of variance analysis showed no significant difference between prevalence of chronic pain after mastectomy alone versus mastectomy and reconstruction (P = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis establishes that postmastectomy reconstruction does not increase the incidence of PMPS. However, because this neuropathic pain often persists after reconstructive surgery, it is incumbent on the plastic surgeon to counsel patients on PMPS. Moving forward, prospective studies on the effects of reconstruction type and adjunct procedures are warranted.

A Critical Analysis of Prosthetic Augmentation of Autologous Microvascular Breast Reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: The combined approach using both an implant and autologous tissue for breast reconstruction has become more common over the last 10 years. We sought to provide a systematic review and outcomes analysis of this technique. METHODS: We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library database to identify studies that described implant augmentation of autologous flaps for breast reconstruction. The references of selected articles were also reviewed to identify any additional pertinent articles. RESULTS: We identified 11 articles, which included 230 patients and 378 flaps. Implants used ranged in size from 90 to 510 cc, with an average size of 198 cc. Implants were more frequently placed at the time of autologous reconstruction and in the subpectoral plane. There were no total flap losses, and partial flap loss occurred in 3 patients (1%). There were no cases of venous or arterial thrombosis and no early return to the operating room for flap compromise. Eight implants (2%) were lost because of infection or extrusion, and capsular contracture occurred in 9 breasts (3%). When stratified by the timing of implant placement (immediate vs delayed), there were no significant differences in any postoperative outcomes except the immediate group had a higher infection rate. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for women to be candidates for autologous tissue breast reconstruction can be expanded by adding an implant underneath the flap. We found the overall flap loss rate is comparable with standard autologous flap reconstruction, and the implant loss rate is lower than that in patients who undergo prosthetic reconstruction alone.

Surgical delay of anterior chest wall prior to open coronary arterial bypass grafting surgery may decrease postoperative sternal complications.

Open coronary arterial bypass grafting (CABG) procedures are inherently risky in regards to the healing capacity of the subsequent sternal wound. Patients often have underlying risk factors for poor healing and the procedure itself often reduces vascularity to the anterior chest with internal mammary artery (IMA) dissection. Currently unrelated is the surgical delay procedure. It is a well-established technique for augmenting vascularity and ultimatelytissue survival. It involves partial disruption of the blood supply to a flap for a period of time prior to fully elevating the flap (usually between 3 and 21 days). Recently, endoscopic robotic IMA dissection has become possible as a part of totally endoscopic CABGs for left-sided vessel disease. We are proposing a new technique, using surgical delay for patients who require open sternotomies for CABGS to reduce the rate of postoperative sternal wound complications. To delay the CABG, the majority of a robotic internal IMA dissectionwould be performed prior to an open CABG via a midline sternotomy. We hypothesize that this may decrease sternal wound complication rates. Potential pitfalls include consequences of disrupting the normal anatomic location of the IMAs and causing inflammation before the open CABG. Animal models will be the next step, as they will evaluate the feasibility of the delay as well as help to determine the optimal timing for the procedure.

Reconstruction of Intrapelvic Defects Using the Free Anterolateral Thigh Flap: Expanding the Traditional Algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of intrapelvic soft tissue defects traditionally relies on regional pedicled myocutaneous flaps. However, there remain situations in which local options are unavailable. We review our experience treating intrapelvic defects with the anterolateral thigh (ALT) microvascular free flap. METHODS: A retrospective, institutional review was conducted from 2014 to 2018 of patients undergoing microvascular ALT flap reconstruction of intrapelvic defects. Four patients were identified in this cohort out of 92 total pelvic reconstruction cases. RESULTS: All patients underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer treatment. In the two male patients, pelvic abscesses and bladder leak necessitated soft tissue reconstruction after radiation and APR. In both, regional tissue options were unavailable, and a buried ALT free flap was used for soft tissue reconstruction. Both female patients developed rectovaginal fistulas secondary to their tumor burden, necessitating posterior vaginal wall resections. Prior surgical scars and ostomies made abdominal wall tissue unavailable; thus, free ALTs were used to eliminate intrapelvic dead space and reconstruct the posterior vaginal wall. In all cases, recipient vessels were the deep inferior epigastric artery and vein. Flap survival was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic reconstruction has traditionally been addressed with local/regional pedicled flaps. In cases where these are unavailable, the free ALT flap is a versatile option when buried for intrapelvic reconstruction or posterior vaginal wall lining. We also propose updating Cordeiro et al.'s classic vaginal defect reconstruction algorithm to include the free ALT flap for type IB cases in which the rectus abdominis is unavailable.