Objective To investigate the benefits and drawbacks of breast reconstruction with endoscopic-assisted harvesting of the latissimus dorsi muscle flap for breast cancer and treatment experience of postoperative operation-related complications. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on clinical data of 26 female patients with breast cancer who met the selection criteria between September 2021 and March 2023 aging 48.7 years (range, 26-69 years). All tumors were unilateral, with 17 on the left side and 9 on the right side. The tumor size ranged from 1.0 to 7.0 cm, with an average of 2.7 cm. The pathological staging included T1 in 11 cases, T2 in 14 cases, and T3 in 1 case; N0 in 10 cases, N1 in 11 cases, N2 in 2 cases, and N3 in 3 cases; no distant metastasis (M0) occurred when first diagnosed. Among them, 10 cases underwent breast conserving surgery, and 16 cases underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy. All patients underwent breast reconstruction with endoscopic-assisted harvesting of the latissimus dorsi muscle flap. The operation time, incision length, and postoperative drainage volume in 3 days were recorded. Breast-Q “Satisfaction with back” scale was conducted to evaluate patients’ satisfaction with back at 6 months after operation. Results The operation time was 280-480 minutes (mean, 376.7 minutes), the incision length was 10-15 cm (mean, 12.2 cm), the postoperative drainage volume in 3 days was 500-1 600 mL (mean, 930.2 mL). There were 4 cases of postoperative seroma, 1 case of incision rupture, 1 case of paresthesia of the thoracic wall, and 1 case of edema of the ipsilateral upper limb. All patients were followed up 12-30 months (mean, 20.1 months). No latissimus dorsi muscle flap necrosis, latissimus dorsi muscle atrophy, or shoulder joint dysfunction occurred during follow-up; 2 patients had recurrence of lymph nodes in the ipsilateral axilla after operation, but no distant metastasis occurred. Breast-Q score at 6 months after operation was 64-100 (mean, 79.5). The average score was 78.6 (range, 64-100) in patients underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy and 81.0 (range, 78-100) in patients underwent breast conserving surgery. Conclusion Breast reconstruction with endoscopic-assisted harvesting of the latissimus dorsi muscle flap for breast cancer is proven to be a surgical approach with safety and cosmetic effects with mild postoperative operation-related complications and considerable patient satisfaction.
ObjectiveTo compare the surgical data, safety, cosmetic outcomes, and quality of life of patients underwent a single axillary incision endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with endoscopic harvesting of latissimus dorsi muscle flap (abbreviation as the “endoscopic group”) and traditional open surgery of latissimus dorsi muscle flap harvesting for breast reconstruction after mastectomy (abbreviation as the “traditional open group”). MethodsThe patients were collected, who underwent latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University and the Fourth People’s Hospital of Sichuan Province from January 2021 to June 2024 from a prospective maintenance database, and then were assigned into an endoscopic group and a traditional open group according to the surgical method. Their basic information, information relevant operation, postoperative complications, and patient reported outcomes (BREAST-Q scale) score were compared between the two groups. ResultsA total of 73 patients were collected, including 23 patients in the endoscopic group and 50 patients in the traditional open group. There were no statistically significant differences in the age, body mass index, breast sagging, tumor location, tumor N stage, pathological type, adjuvant therapy, etc. between the patients of two groups, except for a higher proportion of T4 stage patients in the open group as compared to the endoscopic group (P＜0.001). A longer size of latissimus dorsi muscle flap was harvested in the endoscopic group as compared with the open group (P=0.002). There were no statistically significant differences in the total surgical complications, major complications, minor complications, and implant-related complications between the patients of two groups (P>0.05). The most common complication in the patients of both groups was back seroma, 21.7% (5/23) in the endoscopic group and 22.0% (11/50) in the traditional open group. The total length of incisions in the endoscopic group was significantly shorter than that in the traditional open group (P<0.001), and the points of the breast satisfaction (P=0.045), back satisfaction (P<0.001), and sexual well-being (P=0.028) of the patients in the endoscopic group were significantly higher than those in the traditional open group. The major complications did not happen in the endoscopic group, but happened in 2 cases in the open group (1 patient due to ischemic necrosis of the latissimus dorsi muscle and 1 patient due to breast infection resulting in implant removal). During the follow-up period, 3 (6.0%) patients had distant metastasis (all were lung metastasis) in the traditional open group, and there was no local or regional recurrence, distant metastasis, and specific death of breast cancer in the endoscopic group. ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that, for patients who have skin invasion but who desire breast reconstruction or have failed by prosthetic breast reconstruction (such as skin flap necrosis), traditional open surgery of latissimusdorsi flap harvesting for breast reconstruction is worth choosing. However, for breast cancer patients who do not need additional skin breast reconstruction, endoscopic latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction has greater advantages in cosmetic effect, and it is safe and effective.