SIEA Flap in Breast Reconstruction: Is This the Autologous Tissue Flap of Choice?
1
Citation
0
Reference
10
Related Paper
Abstract:
Autologous breast reconstruction has continued to evolve, with significant decreases in the abdominal-wall morbidity associated with these newer reconstructions. Recently, the superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flap has replaced the perforator flaps in the majority of the authors' autologous tissue breast reconstruction cases. They reported their series of 75 SIEA flaps for breast reconstruction with a discussion about the difficulties and limitations of using this specific flap.Keywords:
DIEP flap
Perforator flaps
Abstract The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is widely recognized as safe for use as a first-choice option in autologous tissue breast reconstruction; however, DIEP is often not performed for breast reconstruction in the elderly. We report a case of an 85-year-old woman who underwent DIEP flap reconstruction. Immediate reconstruction was performed after mastectomy. The patient successfully underwent DIEP flap reconstruction with no complications. Other options for reconstruction include a latissimus dorsi flap, a transverse rectus abdominis flap and implant-based reconstruction. DIEP flap reconstruction was performed, which does not cause muscle damage and provides sufficient volume. To our knowledge, this study is the first to report DIEP breast reconstruction in a patient over 85 years of age. This case demonstrates the usefulness of DIEP flap reconstruction for elderly patients.
DIEP flap
Rectus abdominis muscle
Cite
Citations (2)
Background: Every year many patients diagnosed with breast cancer are subjected to mastectomy. Some of them choose to undergo breast reconstruction to restore their body image. Immediate or delayed reconstruction is possible, depending on medical, financial, and emotional considerations. High success rate and cost-effectiveness are two important factors that may guide decision making in the management plan. The objective of this study was to compare the resource costs and success rates of immediate and delayed breast reconstructions using either deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) or superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps. The resource cost is referred to as the cost of operation and hospitalization. Methods: From September of 2000 through August of 2001, 42 patients underwent immediate (n = 21) or delayed (n = 21) unilateral breast reconstruction using either a DIEP (n = 30) or SIEA (n = 12) flap by one surgeon. Results: There were no statistical differences in resource costs, success, and complication rates between DIEP and SIEA flaps in both the immediate and delayed breast reconstruction groups. Conclusions: Using either a DIEP or SIEA flap as the autologous tissue, delayed breast reconstruction is as cost-effective as immediate reconstruction.
DIEP flap
Cite
Citations (42)
DIEP flap
Perforator flaps
Cite
Citations (14)
The ideal autologous breast reconstruction provides a long-lasting and aesthetically pleasing result. The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap remains the gold standard for breast reconstruction; however, in a subset of patients, this flap may not provide adequate soft tissue to achieve the patient's aesthetic goals. The lumbar artery perforator flap has emerged as a useful adjunct to the DIEP flap for four-flap breast reconstruction, and also provides the patient with circumferential body contouring. From April 1 to July 1, 2019, the authors performed two bilateral stacked DIEP and lumbar artery perforator flap breast reconstructions. The authors retrospectively reviewed patient charts for pertinent data. Patients were chosen for reconstruction based on their physical examination and computed tomographic angiography findings. The operative technique used was unchanged for both reconstructions. The average total length of surgery was 553 minutes. The average DIEP flap weight was 510 g and the average lumbar artery perforator flap weight was 680 g. The average ischemia time for each lumbar artery perforator flap was 62 minutes. Length of stay was 3 days for both patients. This article describes the authors' approach to total breast reconstruction with stacked lumbar artery perforator flaps and DIEP flaps while also effectively performing a circumferential lower body lift. Critical components for success include appropriate patient selection and using a team approach with appropriately experienced staff at all levels of care.
DIEP flap
Lumbar arteries
Perforator flaps
Computed tomographic angiography
Cite
Citations (16)
Background: The continuing advances in breast reconstruction surgery allows for high expectation of excellent outcomes and long-term aesthetic appearance. Transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flap has been the flap of choice in breast reconstructions for decades, however it sacrifices muscle and causes donor site complication. Deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is now the preferred flap for microsurgical breast reconstruction, because it holds some advantages over TRAM. This study aim to review, summarize, and discuss the current knowledge of DIEP flap in breast reconstruction.Method: Literature research conducted through Pubmed, Medline, and SCOPUS databases for published articles up to the year 2009. A total of 808 articles were found, and 60 articles reviewed.Result: Women with thick subcutaneous fat and skin on the lower abdomen are the most appropriate candidates for autologous breast reconstruction. Patients might be given oral analgesics instead of intravenous, because DIEP results in less postoperative pain than TRAM. Patients are commonly discharged on the 6–7th day post operation after DIEP flaps. In spite of several reports that DIEP flap has low complication rates, necrosis is the most common and often leads to poor cosmetic outcome.Conclusion: DIEP flap essentially combines all the advantages of TRAM flap without most of its disadvantages. Some complications may occur in smaller percentage. Although DIEP flap has a high patient satisfaction score, it does not mean that it is definitely superior to other methods of autologous breast reconstruction.
DIEP flap
Fat necrosis
Rectus abdominis muscle
Cite
Citations (0)
DIEP flap
Perforator flaps
Rectus abdominis muscle
Demographics
Cite
Citations (57)
The authors report their experience with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction in which an unusual recipient site was used. Successful anastomosis between a suitable perforating vessel from the internal mammary axis and the deep inferior epigastric bundle was performed, and the advantages of this alternative recipient site (perforator to the DIEP flap) are examined.
DIEP flap
Perforator flaps
Rectus abdominis muscle
Cite
Citations (38)
Background and Objective: The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap was first described by Koshima and Soeda in 1989 and is now well-established as the gold standard in breast reconstruction. Lately, this issue has been explored in the context of head and neck reconstruction, highlighting growing interest in the use of the DIEP flap beyond breast reconstruction, but its usage in other anatomical regions appears elusive. Nevertheless, DIEP flap reconstruction may be a viable choice for complex, three-dimensional head and neck deformities while upholding the criteria of minimal donor site morbidity, according to a recent review. To determine whether the DIEP flap may be used successfully in other types of reconstruction, we conducted a review on the use, applications, and outcomes of the DIEP flap in non-breast reconstruction. This is, as far as we are aware, the first comprehensive analysis of all applications of the DIEP flap other than for breast reconstruction. Methods: A literature review was performed using PubMed to include all relevant articles in English or French published up to February 2022. Keywords included "DIEP flap" and "deep inferior epigastric perforator flap". Key Contents and Findings: A total of 1,299 articles were identified with 105 on the use of the DIEP flap in non-breast reconstruction. This suggests increasing recognition of the DIEP flap as a feasible option for reconstruction of most anatomical regions, especially in lower limb and head and neck reconstruction, followed by gynecological reconstruction. The DIEP flap was also utilized in the reconstruction of upper limb, thigh and hip defects. Less commonly, it has been used for penoscrotal, groin, sternal, buttock and abdomen reconstruction. Conclusions: The scientific body of evidence showed the robustness and versatility of the DIEP flap in non-breast reconstruction, with its relative pros and cons at different anatomical regions.
DIEP flap
Cite
Citations (7)
Background: Compromised perfusion in autologous breast reconstruction results in fat necrosis and flap loss. Increased flap weight with fewer perforator vessels may exacerbate imbalances in flap perfusion. We studied deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (MS-TRAM) flaps to assess this concept. Methods: Data from patients who underwent reconstruction with DIEP and/or MS-TRAM flaps between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2011 (n = 123) were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were collected, including flap fat necrosis and donor/recipient site complications. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine effects of flap weight and perforator number on breast flap fat necrosis. Results: One hundred twenty-three patients who underwent 179 total flap reconstructions (166 DIEP, 13 MS-TRAM) were included. Mean flap weight was 658 ± 289 g; 132 (73.7%) were single perforator flaps. Thirteen flaps (7.5%) developed fat necrosis. African American patients had increased odds of fat necrosis (odds ratio, 11.58; P < 0.001). Odds of developing fat necrosis significantly increased with flap weight (odds ratio, 1.5 per 100 g increase; P < 0.001). In single perforator flaps weighing more than 1000 g, six (42.9%) developed fat necrosis, compared to 14.3% of large multiple perforator flaps. Conclusions: Flaps with increasing weight have increased risk of fat necrosis. These data suggest that inclusion of more than 1 perforator may decrease odds of fat necrosis in large flaps. Perforator flap breast reconstruction can be performed safely; however, considerations concerning race, body mass index, staging with tissue expanders, perforator number, and flap weight may optimize outcomes.
Fat necrosis
DIEP flap
Perforator flaps
Rectus abdominis muscle
Cite
Citations (40)
Abstract Background The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is widely used in breast reconstruction and the profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap as alternative. However, the difference between the two flaps in smaller breast reconstruction remains lacking, in particular, the donor site complications. In this case series, the results of small breast reconstruction (≤300 g) using PAP or small DIEP flaps were explored. Methods Unilateral immediate breast reconstruction using a free PAP flap or small DIEP flap (≤300 g) from 2011 to 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Excluding patients with delayed reconstruction, 28 patients, including 17 PAP flaps and 11 small DIEP flaps were enrolled. Flap characteristics, breast and donor site complications, and revision surgeries were reviewed. BREAST‐Q™ was used for quality‐of‐life assessment. Results Compared with a small DIEP flap, a PAP flap was narrow (7.5 ± 1.1 vs. 10.6 ± 0.7 cm, p < .001), short (20.0 ± 2.6 vs. 25.5 ± 1.8 cm, p < .001) and had a shorter pedicle (5.9 ± 1.6 vs. 9.1 ± 1.0 cm, p < .001). There were no significant differences in acute and late complications of wound healing and fat necrosis, but the average number of revisions in the PAP group was significantly higher (1.9 ± 1.3 vs. 0.8 ± 1.4, p = .041). Patient‐reported outcomes using BREAST‐Q™ displayed no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion The outcomes of PAP and small DIEP flaps at the breasts and donor sites are satisfactory, despite that a higher tendency of donor site complications in PAP flap and more aesthetic refinement required in the PAP group. The overall outcomes are acceptable.
DIEP flap
Perforator flaps
Fat necrosis
Cite
Citations (3)