MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2322442163 · doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e31828bd94f

An Estimation of Volume Loss after Radiation Therapy on Free Flap Breast Reconstruction

2013· article· en· W2322442163 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Siba Haykal, Colin White, Nicolas A. Guay

Notice bibliographique

RevuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Établissements canadiensUniversity of OttawaMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineRadiation therapySurgeryBreast cancerBreast reconstructionFree flapCancerInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Sir: Postoperative radiation therapy is associated with significant deleterious effects on free flaps, the most significant being fat necrosis and volume loss.1 Plastic surgeons usually anticipate some volume loss to an autologous breast reconstruction flap after radiation. To balance this, some degree of overcorrection is performed. However, the ideal amount of overcorrection is unknown. If an intraoperative finding suggests a need for postoperative radiation therapy, classical teaching suggests an overcorrection to the reconstruction is needed to counteract the volume loss due to postoperative radiation therapy. We attempted to quantify the volume loss secondary to postoperative radiation therapy in patients with immediate autologous tissue breast cancer reconstruction. This would help give patients the best possible breast volume after radiation treatment to avoid described high rates (28 percent) of secondary procedures on radiated flaps.2 A retrospective review was conducted on all breast cancer reconstructions that were performed by the senior author over a 5-year period, from 2001 to 2006. The charts of the patients who received postoperative radiation therapy were reviewed. Of 356 breast reconstructions performed over the 5-year period, three free flaps (8 percent) received postoperative radiation therapy. Assessment of volume loss in a control subject (n = 1) and in a patient secondary to postoperative radiation therapy (n = 2) was performed with serial surface casting. Volume was estimated using displacement techniques. Serial surface casting and displacement techniques showed an average volume loss of 23 percent at 6 months after postoperative radiation therapy (Table 1).Table 1: Serial Surface Casting and Displacement Volumes before and after Postoperative Radiation TherapyThe control subject was a 58-year-old patient who had received no radiation and who had bilateral, immediate, free abdominal flap reconstruction. Over an interval of 9 months, serial castings showed a volume change of 513 ± 2ml to 522 ± 7ml. The first patient was a 47-year-old woman. She underwent an immediate free abdominal flap and contralateral mastopexy. She received postoperative radiation therapy for a positive intraoperative lymph node (Fig. 1). The total radiation dose was 4600 cGy over 23 fractions. There was a volume loss of 22.9 ± 0.65 percent, which stopped after 6 months.Fig. 1: A 47-year-old woman with immediate free abdominal flap and contralateral mastopexy received radiation for an intraoperative positive node. (Above, left) Six months postoperatively, before radiation. (Above, right) Fifteen months postoperatively, 9 months after radiation. (Below, left) Preradiation therapy cast volume: 915.5 ± 15.5 ml. (Below, right) Nine-month postradiation therapy cast volume: 706 ± 6 ml. Overall percentage of volume loss: 22.9 ± 0.65 percent.The second radiated patient was a 55-year-old woman who received an immediate free abdominal flap and contralateral mastopexy. She had a positive intraoperative sentinel node (Fig. 2). The total radiation dose was 5040 cGy over 25 fractions. The total volume loss was 23.4 ± 4.4 percent, which stopped after 6 months.Fig. 2: A 55-year-old woman with immediate free abdominal flap and contralateral mastopexy received radiation for a positive intraoperative sentinel node. (Above, left) Preoperative view. (Above, right) Fifteen months postoperatively, 9 months after radiation. (Below, left) Preradiation therapy cast volume: 301.5 ± 11.5ml. (Below, right) Nine-month postradiation therapy cast volume: 230.5 ± 4.5ml. Total percentage of volume loss: 23.4 ± 4.4 percent.The study showed us that there is no need for overcorrection of the autologous tissue reconstruction when radiation is not anticipated. A volume-appropriate breast mound can be created, as we observed no change in the control free flap that received no radiation. We were able to estimate, at 23 percent, the amount of overcorrection required to obtain an appropriate volume after radiation. This could allow the surgeon to precisely weigh the mastectomy sample and also weigh and select an appropriate free flap volume in an immediate reconstruction. The cases also show us that if a breast mound revision is required after radiation for asymmetry, it should be attempted more than 6 months after radiation. DISCLOSURE The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this article. Siba Haykal, B.Sc., M.D. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department of Surgery Faculty of Medicine University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada Colin P. White, B.Sc., M.D. Nicolas A. Guay, B.Sc., M.D. Division of Plastic Surgery Department of Surgery Faculty of Medicine University of Ottawa Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,692
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,227
Écart entre enseignants0,218 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePlastic & Reconstructive SurgeryMême sujetReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesTravaux en français237 207