Lumbar Artery Perforator Flap Research Articles

The lumbar artery perforator free flap as an alternative option for breast reconstruction in low BMI patients: analysis of CT Angiography of donor sites across BMI.

In patients with a low body mass index (BMI), the options for autologous breast reconstruction are limited. With the hypothesis that adipose tissue deposition persists in the lumbar region compared to the abdominal wall, this study sought to investigate the lumbar artery perforator (LAP) free flap as an alternative reconstructive option in patients with deficient autologous donor sites consequent to a low BMI. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed, from a prospectively maintained database, of all consecutive DIEP flap breast reconstructions performed in our unit. A randomized selection of 100 patients with low BMI <22, normal BMI 22-24 and high BMI >30 was performed. Patient computerized tomography scans were analyzed to measure abdominal wall and lumbar tissue thickness and to define anatomical landmark relations of the lumbar artery perforator. A statistically significant difference was identified between the ratio of lumbar to abdominal wall thickness between BMI groups, highlighting preservation of the lumbar thickness in patients with low BMI. The mean distance at which the fourth lumbar perforator entered the subcutaneous tissues was 7.7cm lateral to the spinous process (range 6.4 - 9.5cm), with no significant difference between BMI groups, highlighting this consistent anatomical position. This study confirms a greater lumbar to abdominal wall thickness, therefore volume, in low BMI patients, with consistent lumbar perforator anatomy of 6.4 - 9.5cm lateral to the spinous process. The lumbar artery perforator flap should therefore be strongly considered for autologous breast reconstruction in this patients with a low BMI.

Advances in Microsurgical Treatment Options to Optimize Autologous Free Flap Breast Reconstruction

Introduction: Reconstructive plastic surgeons have made great strides in the field of breast reconstruction to achieve the best results for patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer. As microsurgical techniques have evolved, these patients can benefit from additional treatment modalities to optimize the results of the reconstruction. Free tissue transfer from alternative donor sites for breast reconstruction is routinely performed, which was not possible in the past. Neurotization is now possible to address the numbness and lack of sensation to the reconstructed breast. For those patients who develop lymphedema of the upper extremity as a result of their breast cancer care, supermicrosurgical options are now available to treat and even to prevent the development of lymphedema. This study presents a narrative review regarding the latest microsurgical advancements in autologous free flap breast reconstruction. Methods: A literature review was performed on PubMed with the key words “autologous free flap breast reconstruction”, “deep inferior epigastric perforator flap”, “transverse upper gracilis flap”, “profunda artery perforator flap”, “superior gluteal artery perforator flap”, “inferior gluteal artery perforator flap”, “lumbar artery perforator flap”, “breast neurotization”, “lymphovenous bypass and anastomosis”, and “vascularized lymph node transfer”. Articles that specifically focused on free flap breast reconstruction, breast neurotization, and lymphedema surgery in the setting of breast cancer were evaluated and included in this literature review. Results: The literature search yielded a total of 4948 articles which were screened. After the initial screening, 413 articles were reviewed to assess the relevance and applicability to the current study. Conclusions: Breast reconstruction has evolved tremendously in recent years to provide the most natural and cosmetically pleasing results for those patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer. As technology and surgical techniques have progressed, breast cancer patients now have many more options, particularly if they are interested in autologous reconstruction. These advancements also provide the possibility of restoring sensibility to the reconstructed breast as well as treating the sequela of lymphedema due to their cancer treatment.

DIEP Flap versus PAP Flap versus LAP Flap: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of Aesthetic Outcomes, Complications, and Satisfaction.

As free breast reconstruction options evolve, a patient- and body-centric approach can distinguish refined aesthetic outcomes. Although deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP), profunda artery perforator (PAP), and lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flaps are all safe and effective options for breast reconstruction, a head-to-head analysis of these 3 flaps has not been performed. The authors aim to compare these 3 flaps based on outcomes, BREAST-Q scores, and aesthetic results. After institutional review board approval, a retrospective review in a Research Electronic Data Capture database-guided analysis was conducted of patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral DIEP, PAP, or LAP flaps at a single academic institution. Propensity matching was performed to match 50 patients (100 flaps) in each group. Postoperative complications and BREAST-Q satisfaction survey scores were documented, and crowdsourcing was carried out to determine aesthetic preference in the general population. Overall patient postoperative breast satisfaction was insignificantly different across the 3 flap groups ( P > 0.05). Associations were seen with LAP flap donor-site seromas, PAP flap donor-site infections and wounds, and DIEP flap breast wounds and flap necrosis ( P < 0.05). DIEP flaps had a higher raw score average on crowdsourcing survey, although LAP flaps were rated significantly higher aesthetically than DIEP and PAP flaps when undergoing a matched head-to-head analysis ( P < 0.05). DIEP, PAP, and LAP flaps all have favorable outcomes with insignificantly different long-term satisfaction, with comparable complication profiles. Although DIEP flaps may initially score higher, LAP flaps score higher frequently when analyzed in a head-to-head analysis. For these reasons, tailoring breast reconstruction to the patient's anatomy and morphology provides optimal outcomes. Therapeutic, III.

Multi-Flap Microsurgical Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

Microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction (MABR) remains the gold standard technique of breast reconstruction, providing a durable, natural, and aesthetically pleasing result. However, some patients may not be candidates for a traditional deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap, either due to abdominal tissue paucity, the need for higher-volume reconstruction, or prior surgical procedures. In these patients, alternative flaps must be considered to achieve the optimal result. Such configurations include the conjoined (or double pedicle) DIEP flap, and alternative flaps such as the lumbar artery perforator (LAP) and profunda artery perforator (PAP) flaps, which can be combined in a stacked fashion. By combining multiple flaps in a conjoined or stacked fashion, breast reconstruction can be optimized to fulfill the three critical components of breast reconstruction in restoring the skin envelope, breast footprint, and conus shape. When harvesting multiple flaps, the surgical sequence of events must be meticulously planned to ensure an efficient and successful operation. Preoperative imaging can aid the surgeon in identifying the ideal perforator, assess for side branches for possible intra-flap anastomoses, expedite the operative time, and decrease intraoperative complications. Reconstructive surgeons should be familiar with the variety of configurations with conjoined and/or stacked flaps to address patient-specific reconstructive needs.

Microsurgical breast reconstruction in the United States: a narrative review of the current state.

Breast reconstruction with microsurgical techniques allows for autologous reconstruction after mastectomy without the complications associated with alloplastic reconstruction. Autologous reconstruction has undergone significant improvement and now offers patients a variety of options depending on patient specific factors and aesthetic outcomes. This review aims to focus on the history of autologous reconstruction, operative considerations, general surgical techniques for flaps, and indications for choosing the ideal free tissue transfer for all medical specialties and not only plastic surgeons. A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using PubMed and Embase databases. Manuscripts that provided objective data with respect to history of microsurgical options, surgical techniques, patient considerations, and contraindications were utilized for this review with the objective to simplify data for all non-plastic surgeon readers. In this study, we find that patient selection is critical in successful outcomes for microsurgical breast reconstruction. We find that abdominal free flaps are now considered gold standard for autologous reconstruction. However, reliable alternatives exist for patients who are not considered ideal candidates for this reconstruction. These include thigh-based flaps such as gracilis myocutaneous flaps, profunda artery perforator flaps, lateral thigh perforator flaps and trunk-based flaps such as lumbar artery perforator flap. Postoperative considerations involve clinical monitoring and enhanced recovery after surgery. The rate of reconstructive success and flap viability is greater that 95%, even in high-risk populations, and therefore risk stratification should be performed based on an individual basis. While there are no absolute contraindications to autologous reconstruction, relative contraindications do exist including obesity and elderly populations due to the increased surgical and medical complications. While implant-based reconstruction remains the predominant method of breast reconstruction in the United States, there have been many exciting advancements in autologous reconstruction that offers high aesthetic outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Alternatives to the Gold Standard: A Systematic Review of Profunda Artery Perforator and Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps for Breast Reconstruction.

Breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is the current gold-standard autologous option. The profunda artery perforator (PAP) and lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flaps have more recently been described as alternatives for patients who are not candidates for a DIEP flap. The aim of this study was to review the survival and complication rates of PAP and LAP flaps, using the DIEP flap as a benchmark. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. Papers were screened by title and abstract, and full texts reviewed by three independent blinded reviewers. Quality was assessed using MINORS criteria. Sixty-three studies were included, for a total of 745 PAP, 62 stacked PAP, 187 LAP, and 23,748 DIEP flap breast reconstructions. The PAP (98.3%) had comparable success rate to DIEP (98.4%), and the stacked PAP (88.7%) and LAP (92.5%) success rate was significantly lower (P < 0.0001). The PAP and LAP groups both had a low incidence of fat necrosis. However, the revision rate for the LAP group was 16.1% whereas the PAP group was 3.3%. Donor site wound dehiscence rate was 2.9 in the LAP group and 9.1% in the PAP group. Profunda artery perforator and DIEP flaps demonstrate very high rates of overall survival. The LAP flap has a lower survival rate. This review highlights the survival and complication rates of these alternative flaps, which may help clinicians in guiding autologous reconstruction technique when a DIEP flap is unavailable.

The lumbar artery perforator flap in large volume salvage autologous breast reconstruction: a case report

The authors describe a case where a lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flap was used to salvage a failed breast reconstruction and address concerns about the use of LAP flaps.

A novel pedicle extension for lumbar artery perforator flaps: a case report

In this case, the authors describe the novel use of anterolateral thigh vessels as an alternative pedicle extension graft to the deep inferior epigastric vessels in autologous breast reconstruction.

A Guide to Perforator Flap Selection for Buttock Pressure Sore Reconstruction.

Perforator flaps have been increasingly used to repair stage IV buttock pressure ulcers. However, no one has proposed an approach for stage IV buttock pressure ulcers repairing based on the subregion of buttock pressure ulcers. This study aims to evaluate the effect of perforator flaps in the repair of stage IV buttock pressure ulcers, and flap selection was based on the location of the pressure ulcers. Over the past 5 years, we evaluated 65 cases of stage IV buttock pressure ulcers repaired using perforator flaps. Flap selection was based on the subregion of each buttock pressure ulcer, following our approach. A total of 87 perforator flaps were used for 65 cases, including 42 superior gluteal artery perforator flaps, 19 fourth lumbar artery perforator flaps, and 26 descending inferior gluteal artery perforator flaps. All patients showed satisfactory reconstruction. The authors' approach can support surgeons in selecting the appropriate flaps to repair stage IV buttock pressure ulcers and achieve excellent reconstructive outcomes. This method makes the selection of flaps for pressure ulcer repair systematic, simple, and highly feasible and thus is worthy of promotion.

Breast Reconstruction With Simultaneous Bilateral Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps Improves Waistline Definition and Buttock Projection.

The lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flap is a valuable secondary option for autologous breast reconstruction when abdominal donor sites are not available. The aim of this study was to determine how the LAP donor site affects waistline and gluteal proportions, and whether LAP flaps may produce potential secondary benefits concerning donor site aesthetics. A retrospective review of 50 patients who underwent bilateral breast reconstruction with LAP flaps (100 flaps) between 2018 and 2022 was performed. Patient characteristics and postoperative complications were recorded. Pre- and postoperative standardized frontal and lateral patient photographs were analyzed to identify postoperative changes in waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) to assess waistline definition and buttock projection. The patients' individual perception of postoperative aesthetic changes to their waistline and buttocks was determined by an electronic survey. The patients had a mean age of 51 years (range, 24-63 years) and a mean BMI of 26.9 kg/m2 (range, 19.3-37.4 kg/m2). Postoperative donor site complications included seroma (n = 10), wound dehiscence (n = 5), hematoma (n = 4), and wound infection (n = 2). Flap loss rate was 2%. After reconstruction, patients were found to have a more defined waistline, indicated by a significantly decreased WHR on frontal images (mean [standard error of the mean], 0.85 [0.05] vs 0.80 [0.05], P < .005) and a more projected buttocks indicated by a significant reduction in WHR on lateral images (0.92 [0.07] vs 0.87 [0.07], P < .0001). Among the patients who responded to the survey, 73% indicated that their waistline had aesthetically improved, 6.7% felt it had not changed, and 20% felt that it had worsened. An aesthetic improvement of the buttocks was reported by 53%, 40% felt their buttocks had not changed, and 6.7% felt their buttocks appearance had worsened. Bilateral LAP flap breast reconstruction leads to improved waistline definition and buttock projection, bringing patients closer to ideal aesthetic proportions. This reconstructive approach is ideal for patients who are not candidates for abdominal free flaps, but who demonstrate excess flank tissue and seek a more defined waistline and projected buttocks.

Bilateral Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps for Breast Reconstruction: A Perforator Classification System.

Autologous breast reconstruction is continually evolving, with focus on the ideal donor site. This study presents 108 consecutive simultaneous lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flaps and a perforator classification system. A retrospective review of all LAP flaps was completed, and appropriate data were recorded. All simultaneous bilateral LAP flaps were included, and perforator patterns were assessed using CT angiography (CTA). Fifty-four patients (108 flaps) were included in the final review. The mean patient age was 50.7 years, and the mean body mass index was 26.6. Mean ischemia times for all flaps and grafts were 130 ± 64.5 and 300.6 ± 97.3 minutes, respectively. The average pedicle length was 4.6 ± 1.5 cm, and the average composite graft length was 6.2 ± 1.7 cm. Donor-site complications consisted of seromas (10 patients [19%]), hematomas (6 patients [11%]), procedural wounds (4 patients [8%]), and infections (2 patients [4%]). The total flap loss rate was 2.8%. Perforators were classified into categories based on pedicle pattern, lumbar spine level, and clusters, all in relation to posterior iliac bone as seen per CTA. Vascular pedicle patterns were categorized as type 1 (43.9%), 2 (45.6%), 3 (8.8%), or 4 (1.8%). Perforators were dissected at lumbar spine level L3 in 51.8% of patients, L4 in 46.5%, and L5 in 1.8%. The authors present a CTA-directed anatomic perforator classification system to assist in preoperative planning, dissection, and choice of the composite graft best suited for particular perforator patterns or calibers. Simultaneous LAP flaps can be performed successfully with excellent outcomes in cases unsuitable for other flaps. Therapeutic, IV.

Bilateral Simultaneous Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps in Breast Reconstruction: Perioperative Outcomes Addressing Safety and Feasibility.

The lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flap has emerged as an excellent option for breast reconstruction, but its steep learning curve makes it less approachable. Furthermore, length of the operation, flap ischemia time, need for composite vascular grafts, complex microsurgery, multiple position changes, and general concern for safety has led experienced surgeons to stage bilateral reconstructions. In the authors' experience, simultaneous bilateral LAP flaps are feasible, but overall perioperative safety has not been fully explored. Thirty-one patients (62 flaps) underwent simultaneous bilateral LAP flaps and were included in the study (excluding stacked four-flaps and unilateral flaps). Patients underwent two position changes in the operating room: supine to prone and then supine again. A retrospective review of patient demographics, intraoperative details, and complications was performed. The overall flap success rate was 96.8%. Five flaps were compromised postoperatively. The intraoperative anastomotic revision rate was 24.1% per flap (4.3% per anastomosis). The significant complication rate was 22.6%. The number of sustained hypothermic episodes and hypotensive episodes correlated with intraoperative arterial thrombosis ( P < 0.05). The number of hypotensive episodes and increased intraoperative fluid correlated with flap compromise ( P < 0.05). High body mass index correlated with overall complications ( P < 0.05). The presence of diabetes correlated with intraoperative arterial thrombosis ( P < 0.05). Simultaneous bilateral LAP flaps can be performed safely with an experienced and trained microsurgical team. Hypothermia and hypotension negatively affect the initial anastomotic success. In this complex operation, a coordinated approach between the anesthesia and nursing team is paramount for patient safety. Therapeutic, IV.

174. Autologous Breast Reconstruction With Simultaneous Bilateral Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps Improves Waistline Definition

PURPOSE: The lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flap is a valuable secondary option for autologous breast reconstruction when traditional abdominal donor sites are not available. Sociodemographic morphometric analyses have shown that the ideal waistline is characterized by a waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) of 0.7. How the LAP donor site affects truncal proportions and whether LAP flaps may lead to potential secondary benefits concerning waistline definition has never been systematically investigated. METHODS: A retrospective review of 50 patients who underwent bilateral breast reconstruction with lumbar artery perforator flaps (100 flaps) from 2018 - 2022 was performed. Patient characteristics and postoperative complications were recorded. Pre- and postoperative standardized patient photographs were analyzed to identify postoperative changes in WHR to assess waistline definition. The patients’ individual perception of postoperative aesthetic changes to their waistline was determined by an electronic survey. RESULTS: The patients had a mean age of 51 (24 - 63 years) and a mean BMI of 26.9 kg/m2 (19.3 - 37.4 kg/m2). Postoperative donor site complications included seromas (n = 10), wound dehiscence requiring operative revision (n = 5), hematomas (n = 4), and wound infections requiring oral antibiotic therapy (n = 2). Flap loss rate was 2%. After reconstruction, patients were found to have an improved waistline definition, indicated by a significantly decreased WHR (0.85 vs. 0.80, P = 0.005). Patient reported outcomes were obtained from 53% of patients. Among those, 81% of patients felt that their waistline had aesthetically improved after reconstruction, 14% reported no changes to their waistline aesthetics, and only 5% reported that their waistline had aesthetically worsened. CONCLUSION: Bilateral LAP flap breast reconstruction leads to improved waistline definition bringing patients closer to ideal aesthetic proportions. This reconstructive approach is ideal for patients that are not candidates for abdominal free flaps, however, demonstrate excess flank tissue and seek a more defined waistline.

Surgical Outcomes of Autologous Breast Reconstruction in Low BMI Patients; Beyond the Gold Standard DIEP Flap.

Autologous breast reconstruction provides higher satisfaction than implant-based reconstruction in women with low Body Mass Index (BMI). However, the gold standard of microvascular breast reconstruction, the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) flap, can be challenging to achieve due to the paucity of adnominal bulk in these patients. This study compares operative outcomes in women with BMIs less than 23.5 following reconstruction after one of three free flap methods: The DIEP flap, alternative flaps (I.e., lumbar artery perforator flap (LAP) or profounda artery perforator flap (PAP)), and stacked flaps. A retrospective study was conducted on thin patients (BMI < 23.5) who underwent autologous breast reconstruction between 2010 and 2021 by two senior authors (NTH, SST) at a single institution. One hundred and fifteen patients were divided into three reconstructive groups. Flap weights, complication rates, secondary revisions, and fat grafting in each group were then compared. The success rate in all three groups was 100%, with only one partial flap loss in the stacked group. There was a significant difference in overall minor complications and donor complications between the three groups, with alternative flaps experiencing the most. All three groups had similar incidences of recipient breast complications, medical complications, need for secondary revisions, and amount of fat grafted. Autologous breast reconstruction in low BMI patients yields successful and durable results. This study shows that predictable results in the thin patient population can be obtained via alternate autologous methods beyond the gold standard DIEP flap.

Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps in Autologous Breast Reconstruction

The lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flap should be considered for autologous breast reconstruction when a patient's abdomen is unavailable as a donor site. The LAP flap can be harvested with dimensions and volume of distribution that facilitate the restoration of a naturally shaped breast with a sloping upper pole and maximal projection in the lower one-third. Harvest of LAP flaps lifts the buttocks and narrows the waist and, consequently, aesthetic improvement in body contour is generally achieved with these procedures. Although technically challenging, the LAP flap is a valuable tool in the practice of autologous breast reconstruction.

Comparison of Lumbar Artery and Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator Flaps for Breast Reconstruction: Multislice CT-Based Anatomical Study.

Although the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap is the criterion standard for autologous breast reconstruction, lumbar artery perforator (LAP) and superior gluteal artery perforator (SGAP) flaps are recent trends as alternatives. The purpose of our study was to clarify differences of these flaps based on multislice CT findings of the same patient. Retrospective study was conducted on 58 patients who underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced multislice CT for breast reconstruction using deep inferior epigastric artery perforator. Of these, 32 patients' data were evaluated excluding 26 patients' data either for the lumbar or gluteal fat being outside the imaging range or for nondepiction of the vascular pedicle origin of LAP or SGAP flap. Vascular pedicle diameter, pedicle length, and subcutaneous fat thickness were measured for LAP and SGAP flaps. The vascular pedicle diameter, pedicle length, and fat thickness were 2.1 (SD, 0.3) mm, 3.4 (SD, 0.4) cm, and 4.9 (SD, 1.0) cm, respectively, for LAP flaps; and 1.7 (SD, 0.2) mm, 5.6 (SD, 1.1) cm, and 2.7 (SD, 0.7) cm, respectively, for SGAP flaps. The LAP flaps had thicker subcutaneous fat and a larger vascular pedicle diameter, whereas the SGAP flaps had a longer vascular pedicle. As donor material for breast reconstruction, the LAP flap is indicated for cases where absolute volume is needed; otherwise, the SGAP flap is more advantageous as it facilitates vascular anastomosis with its longer vascular pedicle.

The Lumbar Artery Perforator Flap in Breast Reconstruction.

The lumbar artery perforator flap is a valuable alternative in breast reconstruction whenever the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap is not feasible because of insufficient or unavailable abdominal tissue. The advantage is the ideal shape and consistency of the flap, in addition to the option to perform a nerve anastomosis with the cluneal nerve. The anatomy is consistent, but there are some technical issues related to the short perforator and difficult surgical exposure in the lower back region. The inclusion of a vascular interposition graft improved the authors' results and facilitated their technical challenges and final inset of the flap. These videos guide the surgeon through the different steps involved in a breast reconstruction with the lumbar artery perforator flap.

Does it Always have to be the Abdomen? Alternative Flaps in Autologous Breast Reconstruction

[English] Deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) or muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis muscle (ms-TRAM) flaps remain the gold standard for autologous reconstruction in post-mastectomy patients, although many women may not be candidates for abdominally based free tissue transfer. In this scenario, there are several other donor site options based from the thigh (transverse and diagonal upper gracilis flaps, profunda artery perforator flap, lateral thigh flap), trunk (lumbar artery perforator flap), and buttock (superior and inferior gluteal artery perforator flaps). This article will provide insight into the history, relevant anatomy, surgical technique and novel applications (neurotization) for alternative flaps in autologous breast reconstruction.

Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps: A Systematic Review of Free Tissue Transfers and Anatomical Characteristics.

The lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flap has gained popularity as a versatile flap in reconstructive surgery; however, few studies have analyzed salient characteristics of this flap. We set out to provide a comprehensive appraisal of free tissue transfers of LAP flaps with specific attention to anatomic features and clinical outcomes. Using preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, we identified clinical, radiographic, and cadaveric studies of LAP flaps and assessed outcomes, complications, and anatomic parameters, such as pedicle length, diameter, location, and course. A total of 254 articles were initially reviewed, of which 18 met the final inclusion criteria. Ten studies were primarily concerned with anatomic characteristics, and most clinical studies related to breast reconstruction. The operative durations varied between 4.8 and 9.2 hours. Partial and total flap losses were estimated at 2.6% and 7.6%, respectively. Acute revision rates ranged from 16% to 24% related to hematoma, arterial thrombus, and venous thrombus. Donor-site seromas were frequently encountered in breast reconstruction with an incidence of 17% to 78%. The LAP flap has demonstrated favorable outcomes in various reconstructive scenarios. The caudal perforators generally offer more pedicle length, greater pedicle diameter, and septocutaneous course and may be better suited for flap design. For breast reconstruction, the LAP flap is a useful alternative to abdominal-based flaps, and special attention should be given to optimizing pedicle length using interposition grafts and methods that minimize seroma formation at the donor site.

Harvesting Composite Arterial and Vein Grafts from Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery and Vein: A Safe Five-Step Method of Preparation.

As the use of stacked flaps and options for autologous breast reconstruction increase, the level of complexity in autologous breast reconstruction has risen. Frequently, these reconstruction types present technical challenges such as vessel mismatches and short pedicle length. In this study, the authors introduce their five steps of harvesting composite deep inferior epigastric artery (DIEA) and deep inferior epigastric vein (DIEV) grafts to overcome such challenges. The authors performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent microvascular reconstruction using DIEA/DIEV grafts from 2012 to 2020. The grafts were harvested using the five steps, as follows: step 1, a transverse, paramedian skin incision was made at the level of suprapubic crease; step 2, an oblique fasciotomy was made on the lateral rectus border; step 3, DIEA/DIEV vessels were identified and exposed past the confluence of two venae comitantes; step 4, DIEA/DIEV grafts were harvested while sparing motor nerves; and step 5, fascial closure was performed. A total of 40 DIEA/DIEV grafts were used in 25 patients (lumbar artery perforator flaps, n = 25; lateral thigh flaps, n = 1; superficial inferior epigastric artery flaps, n = 12; and flap salvage, n = 2) for breast reconstruction. The average time of harvest was 28 minutes, and there were two flap losses. In the authors' experience, DIEA/DIEV grafts can be safely harvested and used in flaps with short pedicles and small vessel size. Although the authors' experience was limited to breast reconstruction, the DIEA/DIEV grafts can be used for other types of reconstruction, especially for head and neck reconstruction.