Sir:
We thank the authors for their response to our article entitled “The Split Pectoralis Flap: Combining the Benefits of Pectoralis Major Advancement and Turnover Techniques in One Flap” (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139:1474–1477).1 Postoperative hematomas are a special concern in the cardiovascular patient, as many of these patients require anticoagulation during the perioperative setting. At our institution, the postoperative heparin protocol includes bedrest for 2 days and the initiation of anticoagulation with heparin without a loading dose on postoperative day 1. Fortunately, we have not seen a high bleeding and hematoma rate using this protocol. Although it is true that this population is often anticoagulated before undergoing sternal reconstruction, in patients with prior biomechanical valves, the risk of perioperative thromboembolic events is low for short-term interruption of anticoagulation, specifically, when the drug regimen is stopped for 1 to 3 days preoperatively and 1 to 7 days postoperatively.2
Parisi et al. also bring up an outstanding point with regard to the blood supply of the pectoralis turnover flap in the absence of bilateral internal mammary arteries, because of their harvest for cardiac surgery.3 At our institution, it is rare for cardiovascular surgeons to use both arteries, as a higher sternal wound rate has been observed for patients with a history of bilateral internal mammary artery harvest when compared to unilateral harvest. In a randomized controlled study by Taggart et al. performed at 28 cardiac centers in seven countries, the rate of sternal wound complications was 3.5 percent in the bilateral internal mammary artery harvest group versus 1.9 percent in the unilateral internal mammary artery harvest group (p = 0.005).4 In a recent meta-analysis by Buttar et al., the incidence of deep sternal wound infection was significantly greater in the bilateral internal mammary artery harvest group (1.8 percent) compared with the unilateral harvest group (1.4 percent) (p = 0.0008).5 During our preoperative planning, if both internal mammary arteries have been harvested, we refrain from performing a split pectoris turnover flap, and instead perform a bilateral advancement. In addition, we use Doppler imaging to confirm the blood supply intraoperatively. If there is inadequate healthy tissue to fill the inferior dead space, we use the rectus abdominis or omental flaps for additional bulk. However, the use of these flaps adds abdominal donor-site morbidity.
Alternatively, the excellent technique described by Parisi et al. with staged reconstruction for sternal wounds using débridement and negative-pressure therapy followed by unilateral pectoralis advancement and rectus abdominis fascia for inferior sternal wound coverage can be used in these patients.3 When at least one internal mammary artery is available, the split pectoralis turnover flap eliminates the necessity of a second donor site, provides healthy vascularized tissue to enhance wound healing, and is a versatile option for inferior sternal wound coverage.
DISCLOSURE
The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this communication.
Katarzyna Kania, M.D., M.P.H.
Shayan Izaddoost, M.D., Ph.D.
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, Texas
REFERENCES
1. Brown RH, Sharabi SE, Kania KE, Hollier LH Jr, Izaddoost SA. The split pectoralis flap: Combining the benefits of pectoralis major advancement and turnover techniques in one flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139:14741477.
2. Tinker JH, Tarhan S. Discontinuing anticoagulant therapy in surgical patients with cardiac valve prostheses: Observations in 180 operations. JAMA 1978;239:738739.
3. Parisi P, Lo Torto F, Carlesimo B, Ribuffo D, Scuderi N. The split pectoralis flap: Combining the benefits of pectoralis major advancement and turnover techniques in one flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141:191e192e.
4. Taggart DP, Altman DG, Gray AM, et al.; ART Investigators. Randomized trial of bilateral versus single internal-thoracic-artery grafts. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:25402549.
5. Buttar SN, Yan TD, Taggart DP, Tian DH. Long-term and short-term outcomes of using bilateral internal mammary artery grafting versus left internal mammary artery grafting: A meta-analysis. Heart 2017;103:14191426.
GUIDELINES
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.
