Using Mesh to Reinforce the Abdominal Wall in Abdominal Free Flaps for Breast Reconstruction: Is There a Benefit? What are the Risks?

INTRODUCTION: Abdominal wall integrity may be compromised after abdominal flap harvest for breast reconstruction, leading to bulging or herniation due to weakening of the abdominal wall and dissection through the rectus muscle. Mesh can be used to reinforce the abdominal wall to reduce the risk of hernia formation postoperatively, especially in patients who may be at high risk. In this study, we describe this institution's experience with the use of mesh in the abdominal wall and critically evaluate its impact on patient outcomes and complications. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with an abdominal free flap harvested for breast reconstruction at Stanford Health Care from 2005 to 2015. Multivariate-adjusted logistic regression analysis was used to compare the odds of abdominal complications-infection, bulging, and herniation-between patients with and without an abdominal mesh implanted during breast reconstruction. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred sixty-one patients received mesh, whereas 219 received no reinforcement. In the mesh group, there were 7 (4.3%) cases of postoperative abdominal bulging, 11 (6.8%) cases of abdominal infection, and no (0.0%) cases of herniation. In the group without mesh, there were 17 (7.8%) cases of abdominal bulging, 11 (5.0%) cases of abdominal infection, and 5 (2.3%) cases of herniation. There was a significant difference in the odds of bulging (odds ratio [OR], 0.30; P = 0.01). There was not a significant difference in the odds of herniation (OR, 2.26E-10; P = 0.99) or infection (OR, 1.21; P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: In our current treatment algorithm, patients who received mesh were selected based upon several criteria, including obesity, weak fascia identified during surgery, and extensive muscle dissection. We confirm that the risk of bulging and herniation is decreased in patients receiving mesh. Furthermore, the risk of wound infection was not associated with the use of mesh; instead, a patient's elevated body mass index, as well as tension of closure, and other comorbidities are more likely causes of superficial wound complications. We find the use of mesh to be safe and beneficial in select patients undergoing abdominal free flap breast reconstruction who are at risk for hernias and bulges.

Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Versus Computerized Tomography in Fat Graft Volumetric Analysis.

Studies evaluating fat grafting in mice have frequently used micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) as an accurate radiographic tool to measure longitudinal volume retention without killing the animal. Over the past decade, however, microultrasonography has emerged as an equally powerful preclinical imaging tool. Given their respective strengths in 3-dimensional reconstruction, there is no study to our knowledge that directly compares micro-CT with microultrasound in volumetric analysis. In this study, we compared the performance of micro-CT with microultrasound in the evaluation of adipose tissue graft volume in a murine model. Fifteen immunodeficient mice were given 200 µL of adipose tissue grafts. In vivo volumetric analysis of the grafts by micro-CT and microultrasound was conducted at discrete time points up to postoperative day 105. Three mice were killed at multiple time points, and explanted grafts were reimaged by CT and ultrasound, as mentioned previously. Analysis revealed that in vivo graft volumes measured by micro-CT do not differ significantly from those of microultrasound. Furthermore, both micro-CT and microultrasound were capable of accurately measuring fat grafts as in vivo volumes closely correlated with explanted volumes. Finally, ultrasound was found to yield improved soft tissue contrast compared with micro-CT. Therefore, either modality may be used, depending on experimental needs.

Free flap scalp reconstruction in a 91-year-old patient under local-regional anesthesia: case report and review of the literature.

In the elderly population with significant medical comorbidities, the safety of general anesthesia is often in question. In the head and neck, where regional and extradural anesthesia are not options, reconstruction of defects requiring free tissue transfer becomes a particular challenge for patients in whom general anesthesia is contraindicated. We present a case of a scalp reconstruction utilizing a latissimus dorsi free flap in a 91-year-old man performed entirely under local and regional anesthesia. General anesthesia was contraindicated secondary to the patient's multiple medical comorbidities. A paravertebral block was used for the harvest of the latissimus dorsi muscle and skin grafts. The microvascular portion of the procedure and the inset were performed under local anesthesia alone. The patient tolerated the procedure, and the operation was successful. This case is unique in that there are no published reports of head and neck free tissue transfer being performed entirely under local-regional anesthesia. We conclude that despite the medical challenges of performing complex reconstruction in elderly patients, expedient free tissue transfer can offer patients access to successful reconstruction.