Case 11 (2024): Pushing the Limits of Unilateral Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Bilateral TMG Flap with Immediate Nipple-Areolar-Complex Reconstruction

Oliver Didzun; Adriana Panayi; Amir K. Bigdeli

Journal of Plastic, Breast & Reconstructive Surgery·Informes quirúrgicos de acceso abierto revisados por paresRevisado por pares · Acceso abierto

Case 11 (2024): Pushing the Limits of Unilateral Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Bilateral TMG Flap with Immediate Nipple-Areolar-Complex Reconstruction · JPBRS

Informe de caso

Case 11 (2024): Pushing the Limits of Unilateral Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Bilateral TMG Flap with Immediate Nipple-Areolar-Complex Reconstruction

Oliver Didzun¹, Adriana Panayi¹, Amir K. Bigdeli¹

¹BG Ludwigshafen, Germany

Publicado 1 de abril de 2024108 vistas8 min de lectura

Autologous breast reconstructionbreast reconstructionTMG flapNAC reconstructionNipple-Areolar-Complex Reconstructionbilateral

Exportar:RIS BibTeX

Resumen

Puntos clave de aprendizaje

Pearls

Successfully achieved a favorable aesthetic and functional outcome, ensuring the patient remains pain-free, all within a single surgery.
Preserved a high breast volume in a patient with limited abdominal fat reserves.
Employed immediate NAC reconstruction to facilitate initial flap monitoring and reduce the need of additional surgeries.
Ensured minimal long-term donor-site morbidity, highlighting the procedure’s efficiency.

Pitfalls

The concurrent use of two independent free flaps for breast reconstruction, while innovative, demands considerable microsurgical expertise and experience from the surgical team.
The necessity for two separate free flaps extends the duration of surgery, potentially increasing patient risk and recovery time.
The procedure entails performing at least four microsurgical anastomoses within a constrained space, heightening the possibility of microvascular complications.
Particularly for patients engaged in activities like horseback riding, careful selection is crucial due to the potential for postoperative strength loss in leg adduction.
Comprehensive preoperative blood testing, including checks for covert coagulopathies and baseline hemoglobin levels, is essential to minimizing surgical risks and ensuring patient safety.

Patient history

A 59-year-old female with a history of an extensive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS, staged as pTis m(DCIS), pN0 (0/1, sn), L0, V0, Pn0, R0) of the right breast was subjected to a skin-sparing mastectomy and sentinel lymph node excision, accompanied by the immediate implantation of a tissue expander. Three months postoperatively, the patient presented at our institution seeking consultation for autologous breast reconstruction due to a progressive and painful foreign body sensation in her right breast. The patient had no familial history of breast cancer and no prior incidents of thrombotic events. Notably, her medical history was significant for the presence of carotid artery plaques, with no other pre-existing conditions reported.

Examination

Upon clinical examination, the patient was found to be in satisfactory overall health, with a body weight of 67 kg and a height of 1.70 meters, resulting in a (BMI) of 23.2 kg/m2. A notable finding was the asymmetry between the breasts, with the right breast being a size C cup and the left a size D cup. The right breast exhibited a horizontally oriented scar on its anterior surface, accompanied by the absence of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC). There was no evidence of capsular contracture. Palpation of the skin envelope over the expander revealed a moderate skin thickness, with the expander being palpable and eliciting pain upon examination. Moreover, the left breast showed pseudoptosis. The measurements for the right breast indicated a breast width of 16.5 cm and a projection of 7 cm, with the NAC being absent. The patient’s abdomen was noted to be slim, with minimal excess tissue. The thighs were found to have adequate tissue availability for potential reconstructive procedures. There were no visible or palpable scars, nor any signs of tissue damage on the thighs or abdomen.

Pre-operative considerations

Autologous breast reconstruction, particularly in patients with lean physiques and limited abdominal adipose reserves, remains a significant challenge for plastic surgeons. The use of combined free flaps offers an innovative approach for single-stage reconstruction to achieve considerable breast volume. The following preoperative considerations were taken into account: 1. Painful tissue expander and asymmetry: Clinical assessments confirmed the presence of a painful tissue expander in the right breast, along with noticeable asymmetry. These findings, aligned with the patient’s desire for a surgical resolution to alleviate discomfort and preserve the aesthetic integrity of the right breast, underscored the need for further reconstructive procedures. 2. Requirement for symmetry: The detection of pseudoptosis in the left breast indicated the necessity for reduction mammoplasty to achieve symmetry after reconstruction of the right breast. The aim was to minimize the number of surgical interventions. 3. Implant-based reconstruction concerns: Given the patient’s previous experience of discomfort and pain with the tissue expander, along with a heightened risk of capsular contracture and a preference for a natural outcome, implant-based reconstruction was considered not suitable. 4. Flap reconstruction evaluation: The patient’s lean physique, characterized by limited abdominal and thigh tissue and the need for substantial volume to match the tissue expander, led to the evaluation of various flap options. 4.1 Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) flap and latissimus dorsi flap The DIEP flap was deemed impractical due to inadequate abdominal tissue, even when attempting to harvest it as a bipedicled (double-pedicle) DIEP flap. Similarly, a pedicled latissimus dorsi flap, which would have required implant augmentation, was discounted for its insufficient volume contribution. 4.2 Unilateral Transverse Musculocutaneous Gracilis (TMG) or Profunda Artery Perforator (PAP) flap: A Unilateral Transverse musculocutaneous Gracilis (TMG) or Profunda Artery Perforator (PAP) flap was considered a suboptimal choice due to its inadequate volume contribution. This insufficiency could necessitate multiple lipofilling procedures, increasing the likelihood of complications such as fat necrosis, infections, and a reduced success rate of grafting. 4.3 Bilateral PAP-flap: A bilateral PAP-flap was considered for its volume potential but ultimately deemed less desirable due to the risk of unfavorable scarring on the posterior thigh. 5. Selection of Bilateral TMG-flap: Preoperative planning favored the bilateral TMG-flap strategy for its ability to provide adequate volume while minimizing the need for post-reconstruction lipofilling. This option promised moderate donor-site morbidity and discreet scarring on the inner thighs.1,2 The intact breast envelope also enabled immediate NAC reconstruction, reducing the necessity for additional surgeries and facilitating flap monitoring. The decision-making process involved extensive discussions with the patient, focusing on the advantages and disadvantages of each reconstructive option, anticipated outcomes, potential complications, and the impact on quality of life. Additionally, the patient was informed about the potential for intraoperative adjustments to the planned procedure should a more suitable option arise.

Referencias

Siegwart LC, Bolbos A, Haug VF, Diehm YF, Kneser U, Kotsougiani-Fischer D. Donor Site Morbidity in Unilateral and Bilateral Transverse Musculocutaneous Gracilis (TMG) Flap Breast Reconstruction: Sensation, Function, Aesthesis and Patient-Reported Outcomes. J Clin Med. 2021 Oct 29;10(21):5066.
Christopoulos G, Khoury A, Sergentanis TN, Mackey SP, Jones ME. Bilateral Transverse Upper Gracilis Flaps for Unilateral Breast Reconstruction: A 4-Year Retrospective Study of the "2-in-1" Technique and a Systematic Review With Meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg. 2022 Oct 1;89(4):400-407.

Post-operative plan

– Hourly flap perfusion monitoring by the surgical team for the initial 48 hours post-surgery. – Early mobilization with physiotherapy support from day one, complemented by compressive leg wrapping. – Drain removal once the flow rate decreases to less than 30ml per day. – Removal of holding threads scheduled for day seven post-operation. – Custom-made compression garments, including pants with a pad for the inner thigh region to prevent seroma and hematoma, and a compression bra, to be worn for 6 weeks postoperatively. – Patients are advised to avoid straining the right arm and thighs for 6 weeks to ensure optimal healing. – Outpatient monitoring with follow-up visits planned at two weeks, six weeks, three months, and 12 months post-surgery to assess recovery progress and address any concerns.

Pearls

Successfully achieved a favorable aesthetic and functional outcome, ensuring the patient remains pain-free, all within a single surgery.
Preserved a high breast volume in a patient with limited abdominal fat reserves.
Employed immediate NAC reconstruction to facilitate initial flap monitoring and reduce the need of additional surgeries.
Ensured minimal long-term donor-site morbidity, highlighting the procedure’s efficiency.

Pitfalls

The concurrent use of two independent free flaps for breast reconstruction, while innovative, demands considerable microsurgical expertise and experience from the surgical team.
The necessity for two separate free flaps extends the duration of surgery, potentially increasing patient risk and recovery time.
The procedure entails performing at least four microsurgical anastomoses within a constrained space, heightening the possibility of microvascular complications.
Particularly for patients engaged in activities like horseback riding, careful selection is crucial due to the potential for postoperative strength loss in leg adduction.
Comprehensive preoperative blood testing, including checks for covert coagulopathies and baseline hemoglobin levels, is essential to minimizing surgical risks and ensuring patient safety.

Cómo citar este artículo

Casos relacionados

Case 11 (2024): Pushing the Limits of Unilateral Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Bilateral TMG Flap with Immediate Nipple-Areolar-Complex Reconstruction

Resumen

Puntos clave de aprendizaje

Patient history

Examination

Pre-operative considerations

Referencias

Case 20 2026: Staged Excision and Delayed Primary Closure of a large Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma of the Anterior Scalp

Case 22 2026: Superior Gluteal vessel: A rarely used recipient for free flap reconstruction of lumbosacral defects: a case report.

Case 23 2026: “Minimally Invasive Finger Amputation Using a Volar ‘Toilet seat’ Flap for Invasive Squamous Cell Carcinoma”

Paso 1 — Preoperative planning

Paso 2 — Flap harvesting

Paso 3 — Flap positioning

Paso 4 — Microsurgical anastomoses

Paso 5 — Flap adaptation

Paso 6 — Flap insertion

Paso 7 — Technique Overview

Paso 8 — NAC Reconstruction and holding threads

Paso 9 — Wound Closure

Paso 10 — Follow-up (3 months) – Front view full body

Paso 11 — Follow-up (3 months) – Upper body

Paso 12 — Follow-up (3 months) – Upper body 2

Paso 13 — Follow-up (3 months) – Side view

Paso 14 — Follow-up

Post-operative plan

Pearls

Pitfalls