Outcome after urgent microvascular revision of free DIEP, SIEA and SGAP flaps for autologous breast reconstruction

被引:26
作者
Vanschoonbeek, A. [1 ]
Fabre, G. [1 ]
Nanhekhan, L. [1 ]
Vandevoort, M. [1 ]
机构
[1] KULeuven, Dept Plast & Reconstruct Surg, Univ Hosp Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
关键词
Breast reconstruction; Microvascular free flap; Revision; Salvage; Outcome; EPIGASTRIC PERFORATOR FLAP; SPARING FREE TRAM; DONOR-SITE MORBIDITY; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; VENOUS CONGESTION; RECENT EXPERIENCE; MUSCLE; ARTERY; COMPLICATIONS; AUGMENTATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.bjps.2016.09.017
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Introduction: Microvascular complications after free flap breast reconstruction are devastating, and revision of a compromised breast reconstruction is very challenging. The aim of this study was to review the different characteristics of urgent microvascular revision in DIEP, SIEA and SGAP flaps and to evaluate the final outcome after revision. Materials and methods: A retrospective chart review was performed for all patients who underwent an autologous breast reconstruction with a DIEP, SIEA or SGAP flap at the University Hospitals of Leuven between August 1997 and December 2013. The number of revisions, time to revision, reason for revision, and outcome after microvascular free flap revision were analysed. Results: A total of 1562 free flaps were evaluated during the study period, of which 4.42% required urgent exploration. DIEP flaps (3.38%) had a statistically significant lower revision rate than SIEA flaps (11.76%) and SGAP flaps (8.42%). Venous insufficiency was the main reason for revision of DIEP flaps (86.7%) and SGAP flaps (62.5%). SIEA flaps mostly failed because of an arterial problem (62.5%). SIEA flaps (62.5%) had a higher revision failure rate than DIEP flaps (37.8%) and SGAP flaps (12.5%). We found a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in the outcome of revision in DIEP flaps in correlation to the time to revision. Our overall flap failure rate was 1.79% (DIEP 1.28%; SIEA 7.35%; SGAP 1.05%). Conclusions: The DIEP flap remains the most reliable flap for microvascular breast reconstructions. SIEA flaps are only performed when no suitable perforator for a DIEP flap is present. Multiple revisions are no longer performed, as the outcome after more than one revision is very disappointing. The difference in reason for revision between the different flaps led to the introduction of some technical refinements. (C) 2016 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1598 / 1608
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Simultaneous bi-pedicled DIEP and TUG flaps to enhance cosmetic outcome in unilateral delayed breast reconstruction: two flaps with three pedicles for one breast
    Berner, Juan Enrique
    Magdum, Ashish
    Blackburn, Adam
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2020, 43 (04) : 509 - 512
  • [32] Quality of life, patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome after breast reconstruction using DIEP flap or expandable breast implant
    Tonseth, K. A.
    Hokland, B. M.
    Tindholdt, T. T.
    Abyholm, F. E.
    Stavem, K.
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2008, 61 (10) : 1188 - 1194
  • [33] Bilateral DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction to a Single Set of Internal Mammary Vessels: Technique, Safety, and Outcomes after 250 Flaps
    Opsomer, Dries
    D'Arpa, Salvatore
    Benmeridja, Lara
    Stillaert, Filip
    Noel, Warren
    Van Landuyt, Koenraad
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2019, 144 (04) : 554E - 564E
  • [34] Breast Reconstruction Modality Outcome Study: A Comparison of Expander/Implants and Free Flaps in Select Patients
    Fischer, John P.
    Nelson, Jonas A.
    Cleveland, Emily
    Sieber, Brady
    Rohrbach, Jeff I.
    Serletti, Joseph M.
    Kanchwala, Suhail
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2013, 131 (05) : 928 - 934
  • [35] Autologous Breast Reconstruction with Bilateral Stacked Free Flaps in Massive Weight Loss Patients
    Yoo, Aran
    Palines, Patrick A.
    Maier, Mark A.
    Maddox, Suma S.
    St Hilaire, Hugo
    Stalder, Mark W.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2022, 10 (03) : 4186
  • [36] A Prospective Study Comparing the Functional Impact of SIEA, DIEP, and Muscle-Sparing Free TRAM Flaps on the Abdominal Wall: Part II. Bilateral Reconstruction
    Selber, Jesse C.
    Fosnot, Joshua
    Nelson, Jonas
    Goldstein, Jesse
    Bergey, Meredith
    Sonnad, Seema
    Serletti, Joseph M.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2010, 126 (05) : 1438 - 1453
  • [37] Comprehensive Outcome and Cost Analysis of Free Tissue Transfer for Breast Reconstruction: An Experience with 1303 Flaps
    Fischer, John P.
    Sieber, Brady
    Nelson, Jonas A.
    Cleveland, Emily
    Kovach, Stephen J.
    Wu, Liza C.
    Kanchwala, Suhail
    Serletti, Joseph M.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2013, 131 (02) : 195 - 203
  • [38] Augmented SIEA flap for microvascular breast reconstruction after prior ligation of bilateral deep inferior epigastric arteries
    Hadad, Ivan
    Ibrahim, Ahmed M. S.
    Lin, Samuel J.
    Lee, Bernard T.
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2013, 66 (06) : 845 - 847
  • [39] Meta-analysis of flap perfusion and donor site complications for breast reconstruction using pedicled versus free TRAM and DIEP flaps
    Jeong, Woonhyeok
    Lee, Seongwon
    Kim, Junhyung
    BREAST, 2018, 38 : 45 - 51
  • [40] Comparison of Outcomes following Autologous Breast Reconstruction Using the DIEP and Pedicled TRAM Flaps: A 12-Year Clinical Retrospective Study and Literature Review
    Knox, Aaron D. C.
    Ho, Adelyn L.
    Leung, Leslie
    Tashakkor, A. Yashar
    Lennox, Peter A.
    Van Laeken, Nancy
    Macadam, Sheina A.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2016, 138 (01) : 16 - 28