Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Individual difference in pectoralis major muscle thickness and its effect on single-stage breast reconstruction using a tissue expander

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In breast reconstruction using a tissue expander (TE), sufficient coverage of the TE with the pectoralis major (PM) muscle, particularly with a musculofascial flap, is highly important for avoiding postoperative complications. In patients in whom the PM is thin, intraoperative trauma often occurs, leading to troublesome repair. The present study aimed to investigate the usefulness of preoperative measurement of PM thickness in planning of breast reconstruction using a TE.

Methods

In this case–control study, we identified 68 patients (70 breasts) with mammary carcinoma treated with simple mastectomy and TE insertion from April 2014 to December 2016. We measured average PM thickness at two specific points, sternocostal PM distance on the long axis and sternocostal PM area preoperatively using magnetic resonance imaging. Then, we analyzed the difference in PM thickness among individuals and its relationship to intraoperative trauma to the PM or surgical difficulty creating a muscular pocket (delicate PM).

Results

Average PM thickness was significantly larger in younger patients (p = 0.046) and those with larger breasts (p < 0.01). In addition, average PM thickness on the affected side was significantly smaller in patients with delicate PM (12 breasts) (p < 0.01). PM thickness had a significant influence on delicate or firm PM (odds ratio 27.40; 95% confidence interval 2.01–372.00; p = 0.013).

Conclusion

These findings demonstrate the usefulness of preoperative measurement of PM thickness in planning of breast reconstruction using a TE. Dissection should be performed more carefully in patients with average PM thickness less than 2.9 mm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mandrekas AD, Zambacos GJ, Katsantoni PN. Immediate and delayed breast reconstruction with permanent tissue expanders. Br J Plast Surg. 1995;48:572–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Strock LL. Two-stage expander implant reconstruction: recent experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1429–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. McCarthy CM, Mehrara BJ, Riedel E, Davidge K, Hinson A, Disa JJ, et al. Predicting complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction: an outcomes analysis based on preoperative clinical risk. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:1886–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Alani HA, Balalaa N. Complete tissue expander coverage by musculo-fascial flaps in immediate breast mound reconstruction after mastectomy. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2013;47:399–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Saint-Cyr M, Dauwe P, Wong C, Thakar H, Nagarkar P, Rohrich RJ. Use of the serratus anterior fascia flap for expander coverage in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:1057–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Maeda M, Sawaizumi M, Yajima K, Imai T, Fujita K, Tanakura K, et al. New expander coverage technique for lower complication rates in breast reconstruction; muscular pocket method. Jpn J Plast Surg. 2011;54:1147–54.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Serra-Renom JM, Fontdevila J, Monner J, Benito J. Mammary reconstruction using tissue expander and partial detachment of the pectoralis major muscle to expand the lower breast quadrants. Ann Plast Surg. 2004;53:317–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Salzberg CA. Nonexpansive immediate breast reconstruction using human acellular tissue matrix graft (AlloDerm). Ann Plast Surg. 2006;57:1–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Breuing KH, Warren SM. Immediate bilateral breast reconstruction with implants and inferolateral AlloDerm slings. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;55:232–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sato T, Tauchi H. Micromeasuring studies on age changes in human major and minor pectoral muscles. Jpn J Geriat. 1987;24:27–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lea and Febiger. Pectoralis major. Gray’s Anatomy. 30th ed. Philadelphia; 1985. p. 518.

  12. Madsen RJ, Chim J, Ang B, Fisher O, Hansen J. Variance in the origin of the pectoralis major muscle: implications for implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2015;74:111–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naohiro Ishii.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ishii, N., Ando, J., Harao, M. et al. Individual difference in pectoralis major muscle thickness and its effect on single-stage breast reconstruction using a tissue expander. Breast Cancer 25, 68–73 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-017-0785-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-017-0785-9

Keywords

Navigation