Prophylactic lymphedema surgery in lower limb soft tissue sarcomas: A clinical paradigm in a promising field.

INTRODUCTION: Oncological treatments, such as radiotherapy and surgery, are high-risk factors for the development of secondary lymphedema in the upper and lower limbs, as well as the genitalia. Prophylactic lymphedema surgery (PLS) has previously demonstrated promising results in reducing secondary lymphedema in breast cancer and urogenital cancer patients. We conducted a study to adapt this principle for patients with lower-extremity sarcomas. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Inclusion criteria included patients with tumors on the medial aspect of the thigh and leg and tumor size larger than 5 cm. Group A (19 patients) comprised a prospective cohort (2020-2023) in which a PLS protocol was executed. Lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA) was performed when lymphatic channels were interrupted due to tumor resection, intraoperatively verified by indocyanine green. Lymph node transfer was employed exclusively in cases involving preoperative radiotherapy and inguinal lymph node resection. Measurements were collected both preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Group B (26 patients) constituted a retrospective cohort (2017-2020) without PLS reconstruction, where the prevalence of lymphedema was determined. RESULTS: In total, we enrolled 45 patients with soft tissue sarcomas located on the inner aspect of the thigh and leg (26 in the control group vs. 19 in the prophylactic group). In the control group, lymphedema was observed in 10 out of 27 patients (37.04%). In the prophylactic group, two patients exhibited signs of lower-extremity lymphedema (2/19, 10.52%) with a median follow-up of 14.15 months (6 months-33months), demonstrating statistically significant differences between the two groups (p = 0.02931). CONCLUSIONS: PLS for lower limb soft tissue sarcomas shows promising results, although it is premature to reach solid conclusions. Multicentre studies, standardization of criteria, larger sample sizes and longer-term follow-up are imperative for further validation.

Augmentation mammaplasty with anatomic soft, cohesive silicone implant using the transaxillary approach at a subfascial level with endoscopic assistance.

BACKGROUND: Many augmentation mammaplasty techniques have been developed paying special attention to incision location and pocket plane to achieve more natural-looking breasts. METHODS: The authors' technique of choice in patients with mammary hypoplasia, empty breasts following a diet program, or more than one lactation episode causing skin flaccidity without ptosis is the placement of an anatomical implant using a transaxillary approach in a subfascial plane with endoscopic assistance. Thus, ideal patients are those presenting mammary hypoplasia, empty breasts following two or more lactation episodes, and breast skin flaccidity without ptosis, with the nipple-areola complex placed above the inframammary fold. The technique and its indications are presented thoroughly. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were operated on using this technique from May of 2001 to October of 2003. One-year follow-up results showed highly rated patient satisfaction. One patient underwent an implant exchange because of implant size dissatisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The authors prefer subfascial plane implants to submuscular ones. Possible rotation of anatomic implants and the subsequent asymmetry when contracting the pectoral muscle are avoided. Pectoral muscle is not detached from its insertions, resulting in less postoperative pain. Likewise, the authors prefer a subfascial to subglandular pocket since the weight of the subglandular pocket and the glandular weight itself are borne by the skin envelope leading to breast ptosis development over time. On the other hand, fascia provides additional support to the subfascial implant, thus eliminating ptosis development and achieving good filling of the upper pole similar to the filling provided by subglandular implants.