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
  • [41] Recent advances in microvascular autologous breast reconstruction after ablative tumor surgery
    Pollhammer, Michael S.
    Duscher, Dominik
    Schmidt, Manfred
    Huemer, Georg M.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 7 (01): : 114 - 121
  • [42] Postoperative Monitoring of Free Flaps in Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Multicenter Comparison of 398 Flaps Using Clinical Monitoring, Microdialysis, and the Implantable Doppler Probe
    Whitaker, Iain S.
    Rozen, Warren M.
    Chubb, Daniel
    Acosta, Rafael
    Kiil, Birgitte J.
    Birke-Sorensen, Hanne
    Grinsell, Damien
    Ashton, Mark W.
    JOURNAL OF RECONSTRUCTIVE MICROSURGERY, 2010, 26 (06) : 409 - 416
  • [43] Management of postoperative microvascular compromise and ischemia reperfusion injury in breast reconstruction using autologous tissue transfer: Retrospective review of 2103 flaps
    Coriddi, Michelle
    Myers, Paige
    Mehrara, Babak
    Nelson, Jonas
    Cordeiro, Peter G.
    Disa, Joseph
    Matros, Evan
    Dayan, Joseph
    Allen, Robert
    McCarthy, Colleen
    MICROSURGERY, 2022, 42 (02) : 109 - 116
  • [44] Immediate breast reconstruction after salvage mastectomy: Case control outcome comparisons of DIEP flap and DTI reconstruction
    Jo, Taehee
    Hur, Joon
    Min, Kyunghyun
    Kim, Eun Key
    Han, Hyun Ho
    Eom, Jin Sup
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2021, 74 (07) : 1495 - 1502
  • [45] Clinical outcome and patient satisfaction after mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flaps
    Hoezle, F.
    Kesting, M. R.
    Hoezle, G.
    Watola, A.
    Loeffelbein, D. J.
    Ervens, J.
    Wolff, K.-D.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2007, 36 (09) : 802 - 806
  • [46] Coherences of Cesarean Sectioning Scars and Other Abdominal Scars and Venous Augmentation Using SIEV in Free DIEP Flaps for Breast Reconstruction
    Tinhofer, Ines E.
    Tsai, Tzong-Yun
    Cheong, David Chon-Fok
    Lin, Tzu-En
    Kuo, Wen-Ling
    Huang, Jung-Ju
    MICROSURGERY, 2025, 45 (02)
  • [47] A Comparison between DIEP and Muscle-Sparing Free TRAM Flaps in Breast Reconstruction: A Single Surgeon's Recent Experience
    Nelson, Jonas A.
    Guo, Yifan
    Sonnad, Seema S.
    Low, David W.
    Kovach, Steven J., III
    Wu, Liza C.
    Serletti, Joseph M.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2010, 126 (05) : 1428 - 1435
  • [48] Comparison of Two Umbilicoplasty Techniques in 72 Patients after Breast Reconstruction with a Free DIEP Flap
    Alawadi, Mai
    Lohmeyer, Joern Andreas
    Wittig, Klaus Stephan
    Bergmann, Philipp Alexander
    Shahmiri-Zimmermann, Shanly
    Keck, Maike
    HANDCHIRURGIE MIKROCHIRURGIE PLASTISCHE CHIRURGIE, 2023, 55 (02) : 114 - 119
  • [49] Aesthetic outcome after implant and DIEP flap breast reconstruction: An exploratory, prospective comparison of 25 cases
    Brinkman, J. Nick
    Timman, Reinier
    Gopie, Jessica P.
    Kleijne, Annelies
    Tibben, Aad
    Mureau, Marc A. M.
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2015, 68 (07) : 1018 - 1019
  • [50] Interdisciplinary Treatment of Breast Cancer After Mastectomy With Autologous Breast Reconstruction Using Abdominal Free Flaps in a University Teaching Hospital-A Standardized and Safe Procedure
    Steiner, Dominik
    Horch, Raymund E.
    Ludolph, Ingo
    Schmitz, Marweh
    Beier, Justus P.
    Arkudas, Andreas
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2020, 10