Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Patients Research Articles

Patient-reported and surgical outcomes of profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap breast reconstructions compared to deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) using BREAST-Q

BackgroundAutologous breast reconstruction patients require thorough assessment, with the profunda femoris artery perforator flap (PAP) having become an important autologous reconstruction option alongside the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP). Breast reconstruction impacts patients psychologically, physically and mentally. The BREAST-Q aids to assess patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs). We aim to critically compare post-operative clinical outcomes, aesthetic results, morbidity and patient satisfaction between DIEP and PAP patients, using clinical follow-up and PROMs. MethodsA non-blinded two-armed prospective cohort study was performed. Patients undergoing PAP or DIEP reconstructions between January 2021 and February 2022 were included and followed up for at least one year post-operatively. Demographic and per-operative data was acquired. Breast-Q data was collected pre-operatively, and at 2-week, 3-month and 1-year intervals post-operatively. Results157 patients had autologous breast reconstruction (207 flaps), with 129 (82.1%) DIEP patients and 21 (13.3%) PAP patients. 37 (28.6%) patients underwent bilateral DIEP reconstructions and 1 (5%) PAP case was bilateral. Remaining PAP cases were stacked flaps for unilateral breast reconstruction. Mean ischaemia time for PAP was 55.29 (+/- 15.59minutes) compared to 69.52 (+/- 21.74minutes) for DIEP (p=0.014). Donor site wound dehiscence was significantly higher with PAP reconstructions (p=0.014). ConclusionsAt one year follow-up, no significant differences in PROMs across all domains between DIEP and PAP flap reconstructions were noted. This reflects that PAP flaps, despite having a more challenging donor site and higher donor site complications, provide an excellent reconstructive option with similar patient-reported outcomes when compared to the gold-standard DIEP flap reconstruction.

Evaluating mesh use for abdominal donor site closure after deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Despite improvement in abdominal morbidity with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction compared to prior abdominally-based free flap breast reconstruction, abdominal bulge, and hernia rates have been cited anywhere from 2% to 33%. As a result, some surgeons utilize mesh or other reinforcement upon donor-site closure, but its benefit in preventing abdominal wall morbidity has not been well-defined for DIEP flaps. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate DIEP donor-site closure techniques and the impact of mesh type and plane on abdominal-wall morbidity including hernia and bulge, relative to primary fascial closure. MEDLINE, PubMED, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS were systematically reviewed for studies evaluating DIEP flap breast reconstruction abdominal-donor site closure, where any mesh reinforcement or primary fascial closure was specified, and postoperative outcomes of hernia and/or abdominal bulge were reported. Analysis was performed in Review Manager (RevMan) evaluating mesh use, type, and plane relative to primary fascial closure, using the Mantel-Haenszel method to calculate odds ratios (ORs) of significance level p < .05, and a random effects model to account for inter-study heterogeneity. Of the 2791 DIEP patients across 11 studies, 1901 patients underwent primary closure and 890 were repaired with mesh. When hernia and/or bulge were combined into a single complication, the use of any mesh did not significantly reduce its odds compared to primary closure (OR = 0.69, p = .20). Similarly, the use of any mesh did not significantly reduce the odds of bulge alone compared to primary closure (OR = 0.62, p = .43). However, the odds of hernia alone were significantly reduced by 72% with any mesh use (OR = 0.28, p = .03). Mesh use was significantly associated with decreased odds of hernia alone with DIEP flap surgery, but there was no difference in bulge or combined hernia/bulge rates. As bulge is the more common abdominal morbidity after DIEP flap harvest in a patient with no prior abdominal surgery or risk factor for hernia, mesh use is not indicated in abdominal closure of all DIEP patients. Future prospective studies are warranted to characterize the specific indications for mesh use in the setting of DIEP flap surgery.

BREAST-Q and Donor Site Comparison in Bilateral Stacked Autologous Breast Reconstruction

Introduction: Patients undergoing bilateral autologous breast reconstruction may benefit from increased flap volume using bilateral stacked deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and profunda artery perforator (PAP) flaps. Our aim was to characterize the donor site morbidity and patient reported outcomes in four-flap breast reconstruction. Materials and Methods: Retrospective review was performed for all patients undergoing four-flap breast reconstruction by two surgeons between January 2010 – September 2021. Outcome measures including the BREAST-Q reconstructive module, the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), inpatient surgical site pain scores by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and a post-operative subjective survey comparing donor sites were obtained. Four-flap BREAST-Q scores were compared to bilateral DIEP and to bilateral PAP patients. Results: A total of 79 patients undergoing four-flap breast reconstruction were identified. Four-flap BREAST-Q scores (n=56) were similar to bilateral DIEP and bilateral PAP reconstruction patients. Long term survey outcomes from the LEFS demonstrated improved score trend after 6 months. Mean instances of donor site pain location recorded at the abdomen were significantly higher than the thigh during the post-operative admission. Subjective survey data revealed more long-term donor site pain at the PAP site, a patient preference for the DIEP donor site, and easier post-operative care for the DIEP donor site. Conclusion: This is the largest consecutive series of four-flap breast reconstruction outcomes reported to date. BREAST-Q scores in four-flap patients demonstrate overall patient satisfaction that is similar to both bilateral DIEP and bilateral PAP reconstruction patients. The DIEP donor site appears to be preferred by patients than the PAP donor site.

Comparing Radiotherapy (RT) Late Toxicities to the Reconstructed DIEP Flap in Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant RT (NART) vs. Post-Mastectomy RT (PMRT)

<h3>Purpose/Objective(s)</h3> The use of PMRT in patients undergoing immediate Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) flap reconstructions is well known to cause significant long-term toxicity such as flap contracture, fat necrosis and cosmetic detriment. This can lead to significant long-term pain and impact on quality of life (QOL) (Yun et al, 2018). On the other hand, NART prior to the DIEP reconstruction performed in our institution has been shown to have no detriment in safety and local control but the long-term impact on the DIEP reconstruction remains unclear (Chidley et al, 2021). The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the long-term consequences of NART followed by DIEP versus immediate DIEP with PMRT on the reconstruction. <h3>Materials/Methods</h3> Retrospective comparison of long-term toxicities was done on the patient cohort who underwent NART followed by DIEP reconstruction (from 03/2013 to 09/2019) and patients who had immediate DIEP reconstruction followed by RT (from 01/2013 to 05/2021). Clinical examination was performed to assess the presence of fat necrosis (graded using the Wagner classification et al. 2013) and flap contracture. Breast cosmesis was graded using the Kroll classification (Kroll et al, 1994). Statistical analysis was performed to identify the rate of cosmesis problem, fat necrosis and flap contracture between these two patient's cohorts. <h3>Results</h3> Total of 155 patients who underwent NART and 31 patients who went through PMRT were analyzed. The median age of each cohort is 48 and 49 respectively for NART vs PMRT (p=0.26). Majority of patients in the NART and PMRT cohort received 50.4Gy/28# (78.6% [121] vs 74.2% [23]). Median follow up for NART and PMRT group was 32.5 months and 28.8 months respectively. No difference in local control was reported (98.1% NART vs 100% PMRT). Patients who had NART reported a higher satisfaction rating with their cosmesis. This was reported as ‘excellent to good' in 96.1% for NART compared to 80.1% for PMRT p<0.001. In addition, the risk of developing a flap contracture was significantly increased in patients who had PMRT (1.9% NART vs 41.9% PMRT; p<0.001). This was described as minimal in 29% and moderate in 12.9%. The risk of developing fat necrosis rate was also significantly increased in patients who had PMRT (12.9% NART vs 19.4% PMRT; p<0.001). While all fat necrosis in the NART cohort was grade 2, 50% of patients in the PMRT cohort had pain as well (grade 4). <h3>Conclusion</h3> Our retrospective analysis suggests that PMRT following immediate DIEP has significantly higher risk of late toxicities compared to NART followed by DIEP reconstruction. Whether this translates to a meaningful impact on QOL can only be determined by a randomized study.

BREAST-Q and Donor Site Comparison in Bilateral Stacked Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

Background:Patients undergoing bilateral autologous breast reconstruction may benefit from increased flap volume using bilateral stacked deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and profunda artery perforator (PAP) flaps. Our aim was to characterize the donor site morbidity and patient-reported outcomes in four-flap breast reconstruction.Methods:Retrospective review was performed for all patients undergoing four-flap breast reconstruction by two surgeons between January 2010 and September 2021. Outcome measures including the BREAST-Q reconstructive module, the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS), inpatient surgical site pain scores by numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), and a postoperative subjective survey comparing donor sites were obtained. Four-flap BREAST-Q scores were compared with bilateral DIEP and bilateral PAP patients.Results:A total of 79 patients undergoing four-flap breast reconstruction were identified. Four-flap BREAST-Q scores (n = 56) were similar to bilateral DIEP and bilateral PAP reconstruction patients. Long-term survey outcomes from the LEFS demonstrated improved score trend after 6 months. Mean instances of donor site pain location recorded at the abdomen were significantly higher than the thigh during the postoperative admission. Subjective survey data revealed more long-term donor site pain at the PAP site, a patient preference for the DIEP donor site, and easier postoperative care for the DIEP donor site.Conclusions:This is the largest consecutive series of four-flap breast reconstruction outcomes reported to date. BREAST-Q scores in four-flap patients demonstrate overall patient satisfaction that is similar to both bilateral DIEP and bilateral PAP reconstruction patients. The DIEP donor site appears to be preferred by patients over the PAP donor site.

931 Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) Flap: Impact of Early Drain Removal on Seroma Formation Rate and Duration of Inpatient Stay

Abstract Aim Donor site seroma can follow deep inferior epigastric flap (DIEP) harvest. Post-surgery gradient technology (GTC) garments are worn by DIEP patients postoperatively following drain removal to reduce seroma formation. Early drain removal was considered a contributing factor to increased seroma formation rate. From June 2018 drain removal regardless of output was instigated at day two post-surgery. Prior to this, drains were removed when less than 30mls over 24 hours. We aim to assess the seroma rate post DIEP harvest with early drain removal. Method Retrospective review of prospectively managed database between June 2018 to May 2020. Surgical complications and length of stay in hospital were recorded. Results 200 patients underwent DIEP flap breast reconstruction. The mean age of patients was 52 years (range 28-73). There was no significant difference in seroma complication rate between those who had drains removed on day 3 compared with day 2 ((1.02% (1/98) vs. (0.98% (1/102); p = 1). The mean length of stay in hospital for the 1st cohort was 3.86 days and for the 2nd cohort was 3.23 days. There were no complications related to drain removal. Conclusions Our data suggests that drain removal after 2 days postoperatively with DIEP reconstruction does not affect seroma complication rates. Moreover, it leads to a shorter hospital stay. These conclusions are in keeping with enhanced recovery protocols and an early drain removal surgical process could be advised.

4: Four-flap Breast Reconstruction: Assessing Breast-q And Donor Site Morbidity In Bilateral Stacked Autologous Breast Reconstruction

Purpose:Patients undergoing bilateral autologous breast reconstruction may benefit from increased flap volume using bilateral stacked deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and profunda artery perforator (PAP) flaps. Four-flap reconstruction patients are a unique population in which to compare donor site morbidity of the two most commonly used free flaps in breast reconstruction (DIEP and PAP). Our aim was to characterize the donor site morbidity and overall patient outcomes of four-flap breast reconstruction patients.Methods:Retrospective chart review was performed for all patients undergoing four-flap breast reconstruction by two surgeons between 2014-2019 at a single academic medical center. Inpatient surgical site pain location and pain scores by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) were recorded during the immediate post-operative admission. All patients were contacted to complete the BREAST-Q reconstructive module and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS). Four-flap BREAST-Q scores were compared to bilateral DIEP and to bilateral PAP patients as reference populations.Results:A total of 63 patients undergoing four-flap breast reconstruction were identified. BREAST-Q (n=38) scores demonstrated mean Satisfaction With Breasts of 66.1+/-32.2, Psychosocial Well-Being 70.8+/-34.3, Sexual Well-Being 44.5+/-36.5, Physical Well-Being Chest 72.8+/-32.5, and Physical Well-Being Abdomen 63.6+/-34.9. In comparison to bilateral DIEP (n=180), and bilateral PAP reconstruction patients (n=43), four-flap BREAST-Q scores were similar. No difference in BREAST-Q scores remained after matching four-flap patients to bilateral DIEP patients by Age, Race, BMI, Zip Code, and radiation history. With regard to donor site morbidity, mean instances of donor site pain location recorded at the abdomen (9.72, 95%CI[7.78-11.66]) were significantly higher than the thigh (2.82, 95%CI[1.63-4.00]) during the post-operative admission (p=<0.0001). Mean pain scores by NPRS were similar between abdomen, thigh, and breast surgical sites. Subjective survey data revealed more donor site pain at the PAP site, a patient preference for the DIEP donor site, and easier post-operative care for the DIEP donor site. Further, a majority of patients felt the thighs were aesthetically improved post-operatively (54.29%). Long term survey outcomes from the LEFS (n=35) demonstrated a mean score of 92.4% (SD 10.9). The majority of women would make the same decision for four flap breast reconstruction (81.82%).Conclusion:This is the largest consecutive series of four-flap breast reconstruction outcomes reported to date. Patients undergoing four-flap breast reconstruction have more immediate donor site pain at the abdomen than the thigh, but more thigh pain after discharge home once ambulating. BREAST-Q scores in four-flap patients demonstrate overall high patient satisfaction that is similar to both bilateral DIEP and bilateral PAP reconstruction patients. In patients who require increased flap volume for body appropriate breast reconstruction, four-flap reconstruction is comparable to bilateral DIEP and bilateral PAP by BREAST-Q scores.

Portable Color-Flow Ultrasound Facilitates Precision Flap Planning and Perforator Selection in Reconstructive Plastic Surgery.

Precise flap planning and perforator selection are paramount for successful perforator flap surgery. Portable color-flow ultrasound (PCFU) is a convenient, low-cost, easily accessible imaging modality that is pivotal in the planning of perforator flaps where anatomic variability is the rule. Perforator mapping was performed using an L12-4 linear-array ultrasound probe connected to an Android tablet. Images were obtained with the Lumify app (Philips Lumify, usa.philips.com). Perforator characteristics were recorded (arterial diameter, emergence points from fascia, subcutaneous course, and projection onto the skin surface) using still images and real-time videos. Thirty consecutive patients had 40 perforator or musculocutaneous flap reconstructions over a 2-year period. For the 15 flaps that had preoperative computed tomographic angiography (CTA) imaging, the preoperative sonographic measurements correlated with CTA and intraoperative findings. Portable color-flow ultrasound allowed perforator flap design and selection based on the largest available perforator, the most appropriate flap thickness, and comparison of multiple donor sites including left versus right. Two deep inferior epigastric perforator patients required take-back to the operating room for debridement of devitalized nonflap tissue. The superior gluteal artery perforator flap was abandoned intraoperatively due to proximal vascular anomalies. Overall flap success rate was 98% (39/40 flaps). Our experience with PCFU has rapidly improved, allowing individualized perforator flap selection and design based on each patient's unique perforator anatomy, reconstructive requirements, and donor site characteristics. In our practice, PCFU has supplemented CTA and in many cases has supplanted CTA as the primary imaging modality of choice in the planning of perforator flap reconstruction.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of DIEP vs free MS-TRAM flap for microsurgical breast reconstruction.

The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap may be associated with less long-term donor-site morbidity compared with free muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap (MS-TRAM) flap. However, DIEP flaps may have longer operative time and higher rates of acute postoperative complications. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) that compared the long-term costs and patient-reported outcomes between the two flaps. A retrospective cohort of women who received free MS-TRAM or DIEP flap reconstruction between January 2008 and December 2012, with a minimum of 2-year follow-up, were recruited. Cost data of the primary reconstruction and any subsequent hospitalization due to complications from the reconstruction within 2 years were obtained. Each patient received a BREAST-Q questionnaire at 2 years post-reconstruction. In total, 227 patients (180 DIEP, 47 free MS-TRAM) were included. DIEP patients had significantly fewer abdominal hernia (P = 0.04). The adjusted-incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found that DIEP flap was more cost-effective to free MS-TRAM flap in the domains of "Physical Well-Being of the Abdomen" and "Satisfaction with Outcome." DIEP flap is the more cost-effective method of autologous breast reconstruction in the long-term compared with free MS-TRAM flap with respect to patient-reported abdominal well-being and overall satisfaction with the outcome.

Is Unipedicled Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flap Obsolete Owing to Superiority of DIEP Flap?

Pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap was developed by Hartrampf in 1982 for breast reconstruction. Since deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap was popularized, it has become the criterion standard for abdominally based breast reconstruction owing to its low donor site morbidity, excellent cosmetic outcomes, and high success rates. The purpose of this review is to determine if a unilateral pedicle TRAM flap has become obsolete to DIEP flap. Literature review was performed with key words DIEP flap, pedicled TRAM flap, and comparison of DIEP flap to unilateral pedicled TRAM flap. Specific journals reviewed were Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Annals of Plastic Surgery. Flaps were compared in the studies with respect to donor site morbidity, flap-related complications, operative time, length of hospital stay, patient satisfaction, and cost. Abdominal bulge and/or hernia were found to be statistically higher in pedicled TRAM patients in most of the studies reviewed. Also, uniformly flap fat necrosis rate was lower in DIEP patients. Rate of partial flap necrosis, total flap loss, hematoma, seroma, delayed healing, and infection varied in the studies with respect to both flaps without definitive trend towards specific flap technique. Overall patient satisfaction appeared to be higher in DIEP group in several studies. No significant differences between length of hospital stay, overall complication rates, and operative times between DIEP and unilateral pedicled TRAM patients were noted, and the results varied across different studies. Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap reconstructions were associated with higher overall cost in one study. In a carefully selected patient and circumstances where microsurgery is suboptimal, unipedicled TRAM flap can be a safe and viable option with satisfactory outcomes. It should continue to remain as part of core plastic surgery training and armamentarium of plastic surgeons in autologous breast reconstruction.

Reducing Postoperative Abdominal Bulge Following Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction with Onlay Monofilament Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate Biosynthetic Mesh.

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a biosynthetic mesh onlay on reducing postoperative abdominal bulge following deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. Methods All patients undergoing DIEP reconstructions from January, 2010 to January, 2014 at a tertiary center were reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups for comparison based on whether a biosynthetic mesh onlay (Phasix [monofilament poly-4-hydroxybutyrate], Bard Inc., Warwick, RI) was used for reinforcement of the anterior rectus fascia. Rates of postoperative abdominal bulge were compared between the groups utilizing standard statistical methods. Results During the study period, 319 patients underwent 553 DIEP reconstructions, 160 (50.2%) used mesh and 159 (49.8%) did not (nonmesh). The mean follow-up was 16.4 ± 11.1 months. There was no difference in age (49 ± 9.3 years), current tobacco use, diabetes, or mean body mass index (BMI, 29.4 ± 4.4) between the mesh and nonmesh groups (p > 0.05); however, there was a higher proportion of obese patients (BMI > 30) in the mesh group (45.0 vs. 33.3%; p = 0.03). Abdominal bulge rate following DIEP with mesh was lower than the nonmesh group (0 vs. 5.0%; p = 0.004). In the entire sample, 234 (73.4%) underwent bilateral DIEP and 85 (26.6%) underwent unilateral DIEP. In unilateral DIEP patients, the bulge rate was similar between the mesh and nonmesh groups (0 vs. 4.4%; p > 0.05); however, in bilateral DIEP patients, the bulge rate was lower in the mesh group compared with a nonmesh group (0 vs. 5.5%; p = 0.008). Conclusion Reinforcement of the anterior rectus with an onlay monofilament poly-4-hydroxybutyrate biosynthetic mesh may reduce the risk of postoperative bulge rate in patients undergoing DIEP reconstruction.

Patient Satisfaction in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Evaluation of DIEP, TRAM, Latissimus Flap, andImplant Techniques

Despite a growing literature on patient satisfaction in breast reconstruction, few studies have compared perforator flaps with the more commonly practiced methods. The authors compared four reconstructive techniques and identified factors influencing patient satisfaction. All patients undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction between 1999 and 2006 at a single academic institution were included in our study. A total of 583 patients with tissue expander/implant, latissimus, pedicle transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM), and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap reconstructions received a validated questionnaire on satisfaction, health-related quality of life, and sociodemographic data. Patient response was 75 percent, with 439 completed questionnaires including 87 tissue expander/implant, 116 latissimus, and 119 pedicle TRAM and 117 DIEP flap patients. DIEP patients had the highest level of general satisfaction at 80 percent, and pedicle TRAM patients had the highest level of aesthetic satisfaction at 77 percent (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Health-related quality of life and length of time since surgery were identified as significant covariates influencing patient satisfaction. After logistic regression analysis, autologous reconstruction had significantly higher general and aesthetic satisfaction than implant-based reconstruction (p = 0.017 and p < 0.001). Among the autologous reconstructions, abdominal-based flaps had significantly higher general and aesthetic satisfaction than latissimus flaps (p = 0.011 and p = 0.016). When comparing the abdominal-based reconstructions, general and aesthetic satisfaction were no longer statistically significant between pedicle TRAM and DIEP flaps (p = 0.659 and p = 0.198). Autologous, abdominal-based reconstructions had the highest satisfaction rates across all four groups. After logistic regression analysis, differences in patient satisfaction between pedicle TRAM and DIEP flap reconstruction were no longer observed. Discussing satisfaction outcomes with patients will help them make educated decisions about breast reconstruction.

Abdominal Wall following Free TRAM or DIEP Flap Reconstruction: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Review

Numerous studies compare techniques for free flap breast reconstruction techniques, with no consensus regarding differences in complication rates. This study compared the risk of fat necrosis, partial flap loss, total flap loss, abdominal bulge, laxity, or weakness, and abdominal hernia after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap surgery for breast reconstruction. A MEDLINE and manual search of English-language articles on DIEP and free TRAM flap surgery published up to April of 2007 yielded 338 citations. Two levels of screening identified 37 relevant studies. The Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects and DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to perform the meta-analysis. Six studies reporting both DIEP and free TRAM flap outcomes were used to estimate pooled relative risks of complications and confidence intervals. There was a twofold increase in the risk of fat necrosis (relative risk, 1.94; 95 percent CI, 1.28 to 2.93) and flap loss (relative risk, 2.05; 95 percent CI, 1.16 to 3.61) in DIEP patients compared with free TRAM patients. There was no difference in the risk for fat necrosis when the analysis was limited to studies using muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps (relative risk, 0.91; 95 percent CI, 0.47 to 1.78). DIEP patients had one-half the risk of abdominal bulge or hernia (relative risk, 0.49; 95 percent CI, 0.28 to 0.86). Sixteen studies reporting DIEP outcomes and 23 studies reporting free TRAM outcomes were used to estimate pooled complication rates. Pooled flap-related complication rates were higher in DIEP patients, whereas donor-site morbidity was higher in free TRAM patients. This analysis suggests that the DIEP flap reduces abdominal morbidity but increases flap-related complications compared with the free TRAM flap in breast reconstruction.

Quality of life, patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome after breast reconstruction using DIEP flap or expandable breast implant

In a cross-sectional postal survey, we compared patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap or an expandable breast implant (EBI). We included 34 consecutive patients who had breast reconstruction with DIEP flap and 30 patients with EBI. Outcomes were assessed using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire, two study-specific patient satisfaction questionnaires and a visual analogue scale (VAS) on cosmetic result. There were no significant differences in SF-36 subscale scores between the two groups. On the study-specific questionnaire, more patients in the DIEP group were satisfied with the appearance of their breast (P<0.0005) and reported an improved social relationship (P=0.02), and fewer patients were sad about their body image (P=0.01) after reconstruction than in the EBI group. On the other study-specific items, satisfaction was similar in the two groups. On all five VAS items, DIEP patients reported better cosmetic results than EBI patients. We conclude that patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome were better after breast reconstruction with the DIEP flap compared with EBI, while there was no difference in health-related quality of life.

DIEP and Pedicled TRAM Flaps: A Comparison of Outcomes

Studies comparing similar and sizable numbers of deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and pedicled transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap reconstructions are lacking. The authors hoped to determine whether the DIEP flap has advantages over the pedicled TRAM flap for breast reconstruction. The authors retrospectively reviewed the records of women undergoing breast reconstruction over a 9-year period at a single institution. Patients were grouped by type of reconstruction: DIEP or pedicled TRAM. Only patients with at least 3 months of postoperative follow-up were studied. A total of 190 women underwent unilateral breast reconstructions (96 DIEP and 94 pedicled TRAM flaps). The patient groups were similar in terms of age, body mass index, preoperative chest wall irradiation and abdominal operations, and cancer stage. The median hospital stay for the DIEP group was shorter than that for the pedicled TRAM group (4 versus 5 days, p < .001). Operative time for the DIEP group (5:53 hours) was longer than that for the pedicled TRAM group (4:46 hours, p < .001). The fat necrosis rates for the pedicled TRAM group were higher (58.5 percent) than those for the DIEP group (17.7 percent, p < .001). Abdominal wall hernias occurred more frequently in pedicled TRAM (16.0 percent) than DIEP patients (1.0 percent, p < .001). Abdominal wall bulge rates were similar for both groups (DIEP 9.4 percent versus pedicled TRAM 14.9 percent). DIEP flap reconstruction can be performed with lower morbidity rates and shorter hospital stays than pedicled TRAM reconstruction. Specifically, fat necrosis and abdominal wall hernias are less common in DIEP patients than in pedicled TRAM patients, while flap failure and abdominal wall bulging rates are similar in the two patient groups. These data support the DIEP flap as the preferred option over the pedicled TRAM flap for autologous breast reconstruction in postmastectomy patients.

1025 Recent refinements in free flap breast reconstruction: The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) free flap anastomosed to the internal mammary artery

By dissecting the perforating vessels of the deep inferior epigastric pedicle out of the rectus abdominis muscle, no muscle tissue has to be resected, as is done with the conventional Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous (TRAM) Flap. Hereby, we avoid abdominal wall dysfunction and complications and still keep the advantages of the TRAM flap. The same skin paddle as with the TRAM flap can be safely prelevated on two or more perforating branches of the deep inferior epigastric vessels, which is then anastomosed to the internal mammary vessels. One total flap loss out of 15 free DIEP flaps occurred due to cephalic vein thrombosis. Abdominal wall function was evaluated in DIEP and TRAM flap patients.