Improving quality of life after breast cancer: a comparison of two microsurgical treatment options for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL).

PURPOSE: Vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) entails the autologous relocation of lymph nodes to a lymphedematous region of the body, whereas lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA) creates a direct bypass between the lymphatic and venous system. Both techniques are meant to lastingly bolster the local lymphatic drainage capacity. This study compared safety and effectiveness of VLNT and LVA in patients with chronic breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from our encrypted database composed of patients with chronic BCRL who were treated with either VLNT or LVA and had a minimum follow-up of two years. Patient-specific variables analyzed included pre- and postoperative arm circumferences, lymphedema stages and postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 96 patients demonstrated a complete follow-up period of two years. The VLNT group displayed larger preoperative circumferential measurements, evident in both in the isolated examination of the affected arm, as well as when adjusted for the contralateral unaffected arm. Significant reduction in arm volume was achieved by both groups. However, VLNT demonstrated superior relative reduction rates than LVA, neutralizing any significant arm size disparities after 24 months. Surgery duration was slightly longer for VLNT than LVA. Postoperative complications, predominantly minor, were exclusively observed in the VLNT group. CONCLUSIONS: Both VLNT and LVA offer significant improvement for patients suffering from chronic BCRL. VLNT shows an even greater potential for improvement in more severe cases of BCRL, but involves a higher risk for (mostly minor) complications.

Combining reconstructive and ablative surgical treatment of chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL): safe and effective.

PURPOSE: We investigated whether a one-stage combination of vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) with water jet-assisted liposuction (WAL) can be safely performed and results in improved patient outcomes such as a greater reduction in arm volume when treating chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we included all patients from our encrypted lymphedema database treated for chronic BCRL with VLNT or VLNT + WAL who had a minimum follow-up of two years. We analyzed patient-specific variables including arm circumferences as well as patient-reported outcomes before and after surgery as well as surgery time, surgery-related complications and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Only the mean preoperative differences of the circumferences between the lymphedematous and the unaffected arm in individual patients showed a statistically significant difference between treatment groups (p < 0.05). Indeed, patients treated with VLNT + WAL had consistently larger differences in individual sets of arms and therefore more pronounced chronic BCRL. The mean surgery time was significantly longer in the VLNT + WAL group (p < 0.05). Complications were seldom and similar in both groups. Using a numeric rating scale, the level of patient satisfaction following treatment did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.323). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a one-stage combination of VLNT with WAL does not result in more complications even though it also entails a longer surgery time. This is acceptable as secondary interventions resulting in overall longer surgery times and higher costs can be avoided. A one-stage combination might be especially favourable for patients suffering from more severe chronic BCRL.

[Lympho-reconstructive microsurgery for secondary lymphedema: Consensus of the German-Speaking Society for Microsurgery of Peripheral Nerves and Vessels (DAM) on indication, diagnostic and therapy by lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) and vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT)]. / Rekonstruktive Mikrochirurgie des sekundären Lymphödems: Konsensus der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Mikrochirurgie der peripheren Nerven und Gefäße (DAM) zur Indikation, Diagnostik und Therapie mittels Lymphovenöser Anastomosen (LVA) und vaskularisierter Lymphknotentransplantation (VLKT).

Secondary lymphedema is a complex and devastating disease including chronic inflammation and reduced immunofunction, lymphatic fluid and protein accumulation due to misdirected lymphatic transport, and secondary fat deposition followed by fibrosis. While the domain of treatment still is lifelong complex decongestive therapy, it is more and more widespread to treat the disease with a surgical focus on physiologic, reconstructive strategies or debulking surgery. Lymphovenous Anastomosis (LVA) and Vascularized lymph node transplantation (VLNT) are the mostly frequently applied, reconstructive techniques which address restoration or improvement of physiologic lymph clearance. The article summarizes and discusses the recommendations of an expert panel on the diagnostic, indication and therapy of LVA and VLNT in secondary lymphedema during the 40th Meeting of the Germanspeaking Society of Microsurgery in Lugano, Switzerland, 2018. The expert panel addressed the basic diagnostics prior to lymphoreconstructive surgery, including the inevitable application of Indocyanine Green (ICG) based fluorescence lymphangiography and navigation for both techniques including reverse mapping to reduce the rate of donor-site lymphedema for VLNT as well as the use of lymphedema-specific quality of life questionnaires. Both LVA and VLNT are elaborately described, including tips and tricks on identifying functional lymphatic collectors, equipment, types of anastomosis and documentation for LVA and choice of donor and recipient site, number of includable lymph nodes and management of specific donor sites, e. g. jejunal mesenteric for VLNT. The synchronous and sequential application of LVA, VLNT and/or ablative liposuction is discussed against the background of the effectivity and morbidity of both reconstructive, physiologic techniques. Finally, recommendations on post-operative treatment and diagnostics are discussed. The present consensus paper intends to improve the level of standardization for further multicenter studies in the germanspeaking countries in this aspiring field of lymphedema treatment.

The vascularized groin lymph node flap (VGLN): Anatomical study and flap planning using multi-detector CT scanner. The golden triangle for flap harvesting.

INTRODUCTION: A growing number of surgeons perform lymph node transfers for the treatment of lymphedema. When harvesting a vascularized lymph node groin flap (VGLNF) one of the major concerns is the potential risk of iatrogenic lymphedema of the donor-site. This article helps understanding of the lymph node distribution of the groin in order to minimize this risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients undergoing abdominal mapping by multi-detector CT scanner were included and 100 groins analyzed. The groin was divided in three zones (of which zone II is the safe zone) and lymph nodes were counted and mapped with their distances to anatomic landmarks. Further node units were plotted and counted. RESULTS: The average age was 48 years. A mean number of nodes of 6.5/groin was found. In zone II, which is our zone of interest a mean of 3.1 nodes were counted with a mean size of 7.8 mm. In three patients no nodes were found in zone II. In five patients nodes were seen in zone II but were not sufficient in size or number to be considered a lymph node unit. On average the lymph node unit in zone II was found to be 48.3 mm from the pubic tubercle when projected on a line from the pubic tubercle to the anterior superior iliac spine, 16.0 mm caudal to this line, and 20.4 mm above the groin crease. On average the lymph node unit was a mean of 41.7 mm lateral to the SCIV-SIEV confluence. CONCLUSION: This study provides increased understanding of the lymphatic anatomy in zone II of the groin flap and suggests a refined technique for designing the VGLNF. As with any flap there is a degree of individual patient variability. However, having information on the most common anatomy and flap design is of great value.

Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: Quality of Life after Lymph Node Transfer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema affects multiple aspects of patients' daily lives. The main aim of this study was to assess the impact of vascularized lymph node transfer on the quality of life in patients with lymphedema. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2012, 25 female patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema underwent vascularized lymph node transfer. In 22 cases, the patients underwent a simultaneous deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction based on the superficial circumflex iliac artery. The influence on quality of life was evaluated using the Upper Limb Lymphedema-27 questionnaire, which includes physical, psychological, and social dimensions. The authors also investigated risk factors for lymphedema, such as body mass index, smoking, age, and time between start of lymphedema and vascularized lymph node transfer, and their impact on quality of life. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients (84 percent) had an improvement of quality of life after vascularized lymph node transfer. The mean physical, psychological, and social scores were significantly improved postoperatively (p < 0.001). Risk factors for the development of lymphedema did not influence quality of life among patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema. Skin infections disappeared in 50 percent of the cases. Eleven patients (44 percent) discontinued compression therapy at a mean postoperative time interval of 29 months (range, 8 to 64 months). In the other patients (56 percent), the average frequency of compression therapy decreased from three sessions to one session per week. CONCLUSION: Vascularized lymph node transfer significantly improves quality of life among patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

DIEAP flap for safe definitive autologous breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the commonest form of cancer in women affecting almost a quarter of a million patients in the US annually. 30 percent of these patients and patients with genetic mutations undergo removal of the breast, as highlighted in a high profile celebrity patient. Although breast reconstruction with free microvascular transfer of a DIEAP flap from the abdomen is an ideal form of reconstruction, there have been misgivings about the complexity and potential complications. This study was aimed at clearing these misunderstandings and establishing the value of this form of breast reconstruction. METHODS: 1036 DIEAP flap breast reconstructions carried out at the University Hospital, Gent (five year period) and at the Sana Kliniken, Düsseldorf (three year period) were included prospectively. Comorbid factors like chemotherapy, radiotherapy, patient age >65 years, BMI >30 and smoking were recorded. Outcomes were evaluated over a mean follow up of 2 years. RESULTS: Overall complication rate related to the reconstructed breast and donor abdominal area was 6.8 percent. Total flap loss was seen in only 0.8 percent. The mean operating time was less than five hours. Older age, higher BMI, chemotherapy and radiotherapy did not have a significant influence on complication rates, however smoking resulted in significant delay in wound healing in the breast (p = 0.025) and abdominal wounds (p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: The DIEAP flap is an excellent option for breast reconstruction, with a low level of donor site morbidity and complications. It is an autologous reconstruction that provides a stable long term result.

A single center prospective study of bilateral breast reconstruction with free abdominal flaps: a critical analyses of 144 patients.

BACKGROUND: Bilateral breast reconstruction utilising autologous free tissue transfer is a complex procedure with multiple options for donor tissue available. Autogenous breast reconstruction techniques have evolved over the last three decades to meet this goal. The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of patients undergoing bilateral breast reconstruction with DIEAP, TRAM or SIEA flaps. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective study was performed in our Interdisciplinary Breast Centre from July 2004 until December 2011 in 144 patients. Demographic information, diabetes mellitus type I status, tobacco use, tumor stage, primary/secondary reconstruction, operative technique, adjuvant therapy received, length of follow-up, and complications were evaluated. Complications were divided into donor site and recipient site. To investigate which risk factors were independently related to flap loss (complete or partial), multiple linear regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: The study identified 144 patients who had bilateral breast reconstruction with DIEAP, TRAM or SIEA flaps. For all flaps (n=248), outcome included 98.4% survival and 0.7% vein microanastomosis revision. Recipient site complications included 1.6% complete flap loss, 0.8% fat necrosis, 2.9% partial skin loss/dehiscence flap necrosis and 2.0% haematoma rate. Donor site complications included 3.7% partial skin loss/dehiscence. There was evidence of abdominal bulges in TRAM patients (1.1%) but no hernias in any patients. BMI is a major determinant of flap loss (complete or partial) in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The primary goal of bilateral breast reconstruction is to provide a treatment option that can create a natural, symmetric breast mounds with minimal donor-site morbidity following bilateral mastectomies. These results support weight loss therapy prior to bilateral breast reconstruction.

Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with DIEP flap after breast-conserving therapy.

BACKGROUND: Currently about 70% of women who suffer from breast cancer undergo breast-conserving therapy (BCT) without removing the entire breast. Thus, this surgical approach is the standard therapy for primary breast cancer. If corrections are necessary, the breast surgeon is faced with irritated skin and higher risks of complications in wound healing. After radiation, an implant-based reconstruction is only recommended in selected cases. Correction of a poor BCT outcome is often only solved with an additional extended operation using autologous reconstruction. MATERIAL/METHODS: In our plastic surgery unit, which focuses on breast reconstruction, we offer a skin-sparing or subcutaneous mastectomy, followed by primary breast reconstruction based on free autologous tissue transfer to correct poor BCT outcomes. Between July 2004 and May 2011 we performed 1068 deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps for breast reconstruction, including 64 skin-sparing or subcutaneous mastectomies, followed by primary DIEP breast reconstruction procedures after BCT procedures. RESULTS: In all free flap-based breast reconstruction procedures, we had a total flap loss in 0.8% (9 cases). Within the group of patients after BCT, we performed 41 DIEP flaps and 23 ms-2 TRAM flaps after skin-sparing or subcutaneous mastectomies to reconstruct the breast. Among this group we had of a total flap loss in 1.6% (1 case). CONCLUSIONS: In cases of large tumour sizes and/or difficult tumour locations, the initial oncologic breast surgeon should inform the patients of a possibly poor cosmetic result after BCT and radiation. In our opinion a skin-sparing mastectomy with primary breast reconstruction should be discussed as a valid alternative.

Morbidity of microsurgical breast reconstruction in patients with comorbid conditions.

BACKGROUND: Although free tissue-transfer with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is one of the best forms of autologous breast reconstruction, surgeons have remained guarded over selecting patients for the procedure in the presence of comorbid conditions. This study has investigated the relevance of these conditions. METHODS: A prospective review of all free flap breast reconstructions (n = 624) was performed over a 2-year period at the Department of Plastic Surgery at the Sana Kliniken Düsseldorf. Patients were placed into three groups based on comorbid conditions such as age 65 years or older, active smoking, and body mass index greater than or equal to 30. Flap and donor-site complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-four breast reconstructions with DIEP or muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flaps were performed in 558 patients (66 bilateral reconstructions). There were 36 patients older than 65 years at the time of surgery, 94 active smokers, and 79 patients with a body mass index of greater than or equal to 30. Flap complications such as venous congestion (n = 5), partial flap loss (n = 10), marginal necrosis (n = 15), and total flap loss (n = 5) occurred in 35 cases (5.6 percent). Donor-site complications such as delayed abdominal wound healing (n = 9), seroma (n = 8), abdominal hernia (n = 3), and bulging (n = 11) occurred in 31 cases (5 percent). CONCLUSIONS: Despite having significantly higher complications in the form of delayed donor-site wound healing in active smokers and higher total flap loss in obese patients, the overall complication rates compared with other reconstructive procedures are low. Microsurgical reconstruction with DIEP and muscle-sparing TRAM flaps is associated with low complication rates, excellent aesthetic outcome, and high patient satisfaction, even in patients with known risk factors.

Development of a surgical algorithm and optimized management of complications - based on a review of 706 abdominal free flaps for breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Microsurgical free flaps are a common method of breast reconstruction. Our institutional experiences with 706 lower abdomen based free perforator flaps are reported with special interest in presenting a therapeutic algorithm for efficient decision-making. MATERIAL/METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed. All patients undergoing free flap surgery for breast reconstruction between July 2004 and November 2009 were included. RESULTS: Seven hundred and six free flaps were performed in 635 patients: 451 DIEAP-flaps, 254 fasciasparing (fs) TRAM-flaps and one SIEA flaps were performed. Five hundred sixty four women had a unilateral and 71 a bilateral reconstruction (142 flaps). The complication rate was 0.84% (6 flaps) for total flap loss, 1.27% (9 flaps) for partial flap loss and 2.40% (17 flaps) for partial flap loss less than 20%. 7 patients (1.11%) underwent microsurgical revision, where venous problems occurred. 3 of them were successful, in two cases a partial flap loss less than 30% occurred after the revision. In 2 cases a complete flap loss appeared. Other minor complications included: 23 patients (3.65%) had breast hematomas, 18 patients (2.54%) presented with delayed wound healing (9 abdominal and 9 breast delayed wound healings), and 3 patients (0.42%) with abdominal hernias, 14 patients (1.98%) complained of weakness of abdominal wall. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominally based free flaps a safe and reliable method and should therefore be offered as a standard method in a breast cancer center. The protocol and algorithm presented here can reduce complications in microsurgical breast reconstructive surgery.