We read with great interest the article by Dr. Dzwierzynski entitled “Managing Malignant Melanoma.”1 In his article, the author provides a comprehensive review of the diagnosis and management of this dreadful skin cancer. We congratulate Dr. Dzwierzynski for the meticulous work, and we would like to complement his review by further discussing reconstructive options after melanoma primary excision and/or margin widening.
As outlined by the author, wide tumor excision, including the subcutaneous tissue down to the fascia, stands as the mainstay of therapy for patients with primary or recurrent melanoma. The excision margins recommended to achieve oncological safety often lead to large wounds with both functional and aesthetic impairment. Consequently, plastic surgeons must often perform complex reconstruction to achieve adequate morphofunctional restoration. Adequate preoperative planning is crucial: it is of paramount importance that the surgical technique performed neither affects the oncological prognosis nor hampers the oncological follow-up. Nevertheless, the ideal type of reconstruction in such cases, whether it be a graft or flap, has not yet been pinpointed.2 For many years, flaps have been considered less safe because of the possibility of camouflaging early melanoma recurrence in the excision bed, although this occurrence remains “lore.”3 However, local flaps may alter lymphatic drainage patterns of the wound site, with potential modification of future lymphatic mapping procedures.4 Therefore, many authors prefer to use graft in order to preserve the lymphatic drainage, and use flaps only when a lymphadenectomy has to be performed.5 In the authors’ opinion, both reconstructive options are viable, and to elucidate this concept, we present five situations that could rise after melanoma excision and reconstruction (Fig. 1).
The first case is that of local recurrence of melanoma. In this situation, using a graft or a flap does not change the surgical procedure, which is that of surgical excision with the recommended margins. A patient with satellitosis or in-transit metastasis will have to be treated with excision of the lesion, irrespective of its appearance in a graft or flap reconstruction.
The latter is the case of a patient with nodal metastases. Again, a previous flap mobilization or graft placement does not modify the elective treatment, which is a lymph node biopsy with subsequent lymph node dissection. In case of distal metastasis, the treatment is not related to the type of reconstruction and changes case by case.
From our point of view, graft and flap should be considered equivalent and safe alternatives in reconstruction after wide excision of melanomas. We would appreciate Dr. Dzwierzynski’s opinion on this topic, in order to further highlight which treatment would be more appropriate. In addition, creation of a multicenter study to compare overall survival after graft or flap reconstruction following melanoma excision would be very useful.
The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this communication.
Pierluigi Gigliofiorito, M.D.
Francesco Segreto, M.D.
Luca Piombino, M.D.
Alfonso Luca Pendolino, M.D.
Paolo Persichetti, M.D., Ph.D.
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy
1. Dzwierzynski WW. Managing malignant melanoma. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:446e–460e
2. Roses DF, Harris MN, Rigel D, Carrey Z, Friedman R, Kopf AW. Local and in-transit metastases following definitive excision for primary cutaneous malignant melanoma. Ann Surg. 1983;198:65–69
3. Cuono CB, Ariyan S. Versatility and safety of flap coverage for wide excision of cutaneous melanomas. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985;76:281–285
4. Ariyan S, Ali-Salaam P, Cheng DW, Truini C. Reliability of lymphatic mapping after wide local excision of cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2377–2383
5. van Aalst JA, McCurry T, Wagner J. Reconstructive considerations in the surgical management of melanoma. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83:187–230
Letters to the Editor, discussing material recently published in the Journal, are welcome. They will have the best chance of acceptance if they are received within 8 weeks of an article’s publication. Letters to the Editor may be published with a response from the authors of the article being discussed. Discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be published. Letters submitted pertaining to published Discussions of articles will not be printed. Letters to the Editor are not usually peer reviewed, but the Journal may invite replies from the authors of the original publication. All Letters are published at the discretion of the Editor.
Letters submitted should pose a specific question that clarifies a point that either was not made in the article or was unclear, and therefore a response from the corresponding author of the article is requested.
Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Letters should be submitted electronically via PRS’ enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/.
We reserve the right to edit Letters to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content of the correspondence must be disclosed. Submission of a Letter constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and asignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.
The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Letters to the Editor represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.
The Journal requests that individuals submit no more than five (5) letters to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in a calendar year.