Escandón EYM, Zepeda CEJ, Ibarra PÁS

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 131-137
PDF size: 627.70 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Breast cancer is a disease whose incidence is ever-increasing worldwide. The two pillars of the surgical treatment are: therapy of conservation of the breast, followed by total or partial breast irradiation and mastectomy.
Objective: To report the most frequent complications during the last 4 years on patients who underwent oncological breast reconstruction due to mastectomies performed at Hospital Regional 1° de Octubre.
Material and method: The study was observational, descriptive, retrospective and transversal, and included 79 patients who underwent mastectomy with reconstruction with transverse rectus abdominus myocutaneous flap (TRAM), latissimus dorsi, expanders and breast prostheses.
Results: Complications appeared in 45.6% (n = 36) of patients with breast reconstruction, with a frequency of 33.3 and 66.7% for immediate and delayed procedures, respectively. Statistically significant difference was observed between the type of breast reconstruction (immediate and delayed) and the presence of complications (p = 0.002). The complications appeared concomitantly: at the donor site represented by 11.4%: infection + dehiscence in 5.1%; post incisional hernia 3.8% and post incisional hernia + infection 2.5%. And at the recipient site complications represented the 45.4%: flap necrosis, 8.9%; exposure of the expander/prosthesis, 8.9%; hematoma and seroma, 5.1%; infection/abscess flap, 5.1%; capsular contracture, 1.3% and more than two complications in 16%.
Conclusions: Complications of the receptor site occurred in a superior percentage than average referred in the literature.

REFERENCES

1. Jacobson JA, Danforth DN, Cowan KH, et al. Ten-year results of a comparison of conservation with mastectomy in the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1995;332:907-911.

2. Royal College of Surgeons. Oncoplastic breast surgery. A guide to good practice. Eur J Surg Oncol 2007;33:S1eS23.

3. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brooks D, Saslow D, Brawley OW. Cancer screening in the United States, 2010: A review of current American Cancer Society Guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2010;60:99-119.

4. Cárdenas J, Sandoval F. Consenso nacional sobre diagnóstico y tratamiento del cáncer mamario. México: Elsevier, 2008;9-97.

5. Simmons RM, Fish SK, Gayle L, La Trenta GS, et al. Local and distant recurrence rates in skin-sparing mastectomies compared with non-skin-sparing mastectomies. Ann Surg Oncol 1999;6:676-681.

6. Ibañez M y col. Reconstrucción mamaria con colgajo TRAM pediculado. Rev Chil Cir 2012;64:40-45.

7. Lozano JA, Escudero FJ, Colás C. Reconstrucción mamaria con colgajos microquirúrgicos de perforantes. An Sist Sanit Navar 2005;28:73-79.

8. Pasquale G, et al. Experiencia en reconstrucción mamaria posterior a la mastectomía en el Instituto de Oncología Luis Razetti 2000-2004. Rev Venez Oncol 2006;18:98-102.

9. Djohan R, Gage E, Bernard S. Breast reconstruction options following mastectomy. Cleve Clinic J Med 2008;75:S17-S23.

10. Gutiérrez-Salgado JE. TRAM pediculado: la prueba del tiempo en reconstrucción mamaria. Cir Plast 2011;21:45-45.