CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05389605Updated May 27, 2022

Outcomes of Local Perforator Flaps in Oncoplastic Surgery

An observational study in Breast Tumor, Perforator Flap and Breast Cancer, sponsored by Aga Khan University. Completed at 1 site in Pakistan. Open to female participants. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-05-27.

Sponsored by Aga Khan University · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrollment
25
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

This is a single center experience of using local perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction for breast tumors while evaluating cosmetic outcomes, patient satisfaction and well-being using a validated self-administered questionnaire.

Read the detailed description

Background \& Objectives: Various oncoplastic techniques have emerged over the years to preserve breast cosmesis and symmetry without compromising the principles of tumor excision. One of the newer techniques for breast volume replacement to achieve symmetry and cosmesis is the use of fasciocutaneous pedicled chest wall perforator flaps or local perforator flaps (LPF). The objectives of this study are to document the details of the surgical procedure as well as patient-reported satisfaction and well-being following the already performed surgical procedure using a validated BREAST-Q tool among Pakistani women.

Materials \& Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study will be conducted by enrolling all the 25 female patients who have undergone LPF for breast tumors at The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. Data related to the procedure will be collected on a pre-designed proforma. Cosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction will be evaluated using 2 scales from BREAST-Q BCT domain version 2.0. The questionnaire will be self-administered by the patients during their routine follow-up in the clinic. Data will be analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23. Mean (SD) / median (IQR) will be computed for quantitative variables and frequency and percentages will be calculated for qualitative variables. 2 sample t-test will be applied. P-value ≤0.05 will be considered significant.

02

Conditions studied

  • Breast Tumor
  • Perforator Flap
  • Breast Cancer
  • Oncoplasty
  • Breast-Q

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Local Perforator Flaps
  • Breast Cancer
  • Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery
  • BREAST-Q
  • Breast Surgery
03

In context

Breast Neoplasms

12,544 studies on the registry are indexed under Breast Neoplasms; 2,892 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 25 is below the median of 184 across 2,642 observational studies indexed under Breast Neoplasms.

Browse Breast Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Aga Khan University is the lead sponsor of 290 studies on the registry; 44 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

All female patients who underwent a pedicled fasciocutaneous perforator flap for immediate partial breast reconstruction in the Breast section of The Aga Khan University Hospital were included in the study. For cosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction, a follow-up of at least 3 months after surgery before participation in the survey was mandatory.

Inclusion criteria

  • All female patients suitable for breast conservation who underwent a pedicled fasciocutaneous perforator flap for immediate partial breast reconstruction at the breast surgery section

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • For evaluation of surgical techniques, since this was a review of cases already operated, no cases were excluded.
  • For cosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction, patients who lost to follow, expired or did not give consent to participate in the study were excluded.
05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrollment
25 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Interventions

  • OtherNo intervention was undertaken

    This was an observational study, no intervention was done.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Surgical techniques of pedicled local fasciocutaneous perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction in terms of flap anatomy

    Flap anatomy involves the type of flap

    Time frame: May 2018 to February 2021

  2. Surgical techniques of pedicled local fasciocutaneous perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction in terms of location of perforators

    Time frame: May 2018 to February 2021

  3. Surgical techniques of pedicled local fasciocutaneous perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction in terms of operative time

    Time frame: May 2018 to February 2021

  4. Surgical techniques of pedicled local fasciocutaneous perforator flaps in partial breast reconstruction in terms of post-operative morbidities

    Time frame: May 2018 to February 2021

Secondary outcomes

  1. Cosmetic outcomes of patients following local perforator flaps in oncoplastic breast conserving surgery

    Cosmetic outcomes will be measured using the validated BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy (BCT) domain version 2.0. Patient's answers are converted to a number from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) using the Q-Score tool.

    Time frame: April 2020 to June 2021

  2. Patient satisfaction following local perforator flaps in oncoplastic breast conserving surgery

    Patient satisfaction will be measured using the validated BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy (BCT) domain version 2.0. Patient's answers are converted to a number from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) using the Q-Score tool.

    Time frame: April 2020 to June 2021

07

Study locations

1 site
  • The Aga Khan University
    Karachi, Sindh 74800, Pakistan
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Fisher B, Anderson S, Redmond CK, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, Cronin WM. Reanalysis and results after 12 years of follow-up in a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy with lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1995 Nov 30;333(22):1456-61. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199511303332203. PubMed 7477145 ↗
  • Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, Aguilar M, Marubini E. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002 Oct 17;347(16):1227-32. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa020989. PubMed 12393819 ↗
  • Esser JFS. Biological- or artery flaps of the face [Internet]. Monaco: Institut Esser de Chirurgie Structive; 1931 [cited 2022 Apr 27]. Available from: https://wellcomecollection.org/works/pf3qfx2r/items?canvas=7
  • Hamdi M, Van Landuyt K, de Frene B, Roche N, Blondeel P, Monstrey S. The versatility of the inter-costal artery perforator (ICAP) flaps. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2006;59(6):644-52. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2006.01.006. Epub 2006 Mar 22. PubMed 16716957 ↗
  • Hamdi M, Van Landuyt K, Monstrey S, Blondeel P. Pedicled perforator flaps in breast reconstruction: a new concept. Br J Plast Surg. 2004 Sep;57(6):531-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2004.04.015. PubMed 15308400 ↗
  • Losken A, Hamdi M. Partial breast reconstruction: current perspectives. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Sep;124(3):722-736. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181b179d2. PubMed 19730292 ↗
  • McCulley SJ, Schaverien MV, Tan VK, Macmillan RD. Lateral thoracic artery perforator (LTAP) flap in partial breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015 May;68(5):686-91. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2015.01.008. Epub 2015 Jan 27. PubMed 25660559 ↗
  • BREAST-Q ® VERSION 2.0 © Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and The University of British Columbia, 2017. All rights reserved
  • Pusic A, Klassen A, Cano S. BREAST-Q Version 2.0 © A Guide for Researchers and Clinicians [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2022 Apr 27]. Available from: https://qportfolio.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/BREAST-Q-USERS-GUIDE.pdf

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · May 13, 2020

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 27, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05389605
Lead sponsor
Aga Khan University
Responsible party
Dr. Sana Zeeshan (Assistant Professor, Aga Khan University) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 25, 2022
Start date
Apr 18, 2020
Primary completion
Jun 29, 2021
Completion
Jun 30, 2021
Last update
May 27, 2022

Study contacts

Sana Zeeshan, FCPS, FACS
principal investigator · Aga Khan University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion