The influence of reconstruction choice and inclusion of radiation therapy on functional shoulder biomechanics in women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer
The functional implications of reconstructing the breast mound with a latissimus dorsi (LD) flap or placing an implant under the pectoralis major (PM) muscle is complicated by potential comorbidities from disinserting these muscles and adjuvant radiotherapy. We utilized novel robot-assisted measures of shoulder stiffness and strength to dissociate how breast reconstruction choice and inclusion of radiation therapy impact shoulder morbidity in post-mastectomy reconstruction patients.
Shoulder strength and stiffness were collected from 10 irradiated LD flap breast reconstruction patients, 14 two-stage subpectoral implant reconstruction patients (subpectoral), and 10 irradiated deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap patients an average of 659 days post-reconstruction. Univariate ANOVAs examined surgical group differences in strength and stiffness.
There were main effects of surgical group on vertical adduction, vertical abduction, and internal rotation strength. The LD flap group was significantly weaker than the subpectoral group in all measures and significantly weaker than the DIEP group during vertical adduction. There was also a main effect of surgical group on vertical adduction stiffness, where the LD group exhibited significantly reduced stiffness while producing vertical adduction torque. No significant differences between the subpectoral and DIEP groups existed for any measure of shoulder strength or stiffness.
Disinsertion of the LD, not the disinsertion of the PM or radiotherapy, contributes to strength deficits following LD flap breast reconstructions. The combined disinsertion of the PM and LD compromises shoulder stability in the vertical plane. Shoulder function should be a focal point of the surgical decision-making process and postsurgical care.
KeywordsPostoperative complications Shoulder stiffness Latissimus dorsi Implant reconstruction Autologous reconstruction
The study was financially supported by a Susan G. Komen Clinical Fellowship (D.B.L), a Plastic Surgery Foundation pilot grant (A.O.M), and the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center Fund for Discovery (D.B.L. and A.O.M.).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Plastic Surgery Statistics Report (2017) American Society of Plastic SurgeonsGoogle Scholar
- 4.Wilkins EG, Cederna PS, Lowery JC, Davis JA, Kim HM, Roth RS, Goldfarb S, Izenberg PH, Houin HP, Shaheen KW (2000) Prospective analysis of psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: one-year postoperative results from the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study. Plastic Reconst Surg 106(5):1014–1025; discussion 1026–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Mostaed BB (2004) Role of the shoulder muscles in controlling the glenohumeral joint and prevention of subacromial impingement in overhead activities: a meta-study. Dissertation, Union Institute & UniversityGoogle Scholar
- 28.Kim H, Wiraatmadja ES, Lim S-Y, Pyon J-K, Bang S-I, Oh KS, Lee JE, Nam SJ, Mun G-H (2013) Comparison of morbidity of donor site following pedicled muscle-sparing latissimus dorsi flap versus extended latissimus dorsi flap breast reconstruction. J Plastic Reconst Aesthet Surg 66(5):640–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Wu G, Van der Helm FC, Veeger HD, Makhsous M, Van Roy P, Anglin C, Nagels J, Karduna AR, McQuade K, Wang X (2005) ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate systems of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion—Part II: shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand. J Biomech 38(5):981–992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Cohen J (1969) Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar