Donor Site Morbidity after Lumbar Artery Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dries Opsomer ◽  
Tom Vyncke ◽  
Michelle Ryx ◽  
Koenraad Van Landuyt ◽  
Phillip Blondeel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Perforator Flap ◽  
Significant Risk Factor ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Diep Flap ◽  
Lumbar Artery ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Artery Perforator

Abstract Background The lumbar artery perforator flap is a second-choice flap in autologous breast reconstruction whenever a deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is not possible. Ideal candidates are pear-shaped women who do not have enough bulk on the abdomen or thighs. Patient-reported “satisfaction with breasts” is excellent but we were curious about the donor site morbidity. Methods We performed a retrospective study of all lumbar flap breast reconstructions performed between 2010 and 2019. Patients were invited by e-mail and telephone to take part in a BREAST-Q survey. Results One hundred fifty-four flaps were performed in 110 patients. Sixty-three patients filled out the BREAST-Q questionnaire. The most frequently observed donor site complications are seroma (35.1%), dehiscence (8.4%), and hematoma (3.2%). Correction of the donor site scar was performed in 31.8% of patients, lipofilling of the donor flank in 5.2%, and liposuction of the contralateral flank in 18.3% of patients. Body mass index (BMI) was the only significant risk factor for donor site complications. Patient-reported “satisfaction with donor site appearance” was good but significantly lower for primary reconstructions compared with secondary and tertiary procedures. Flap weight significantly influences patient-reported “physical wellbeing of the donor site.” Ninety-seven percent of patients would recommend the surgery to someone in a similar position and would do it all over. Conclusion The lumbar artery perforator flap is a good alternative for breast reconstruction in selected patients. The donor site issues consist mainly of seromas, prolonged discomfort, and a scar that might be noticeable to others, but patient-reported satisfaction is very high.

Alternative flaps for microsurgical breast reconstruction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1107-1114
Author(s):  
Hinne A. Rakhorst
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Perforator Flap ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
The Body ◽  
Diep Flap ◽  
Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator ◽  
Muscle Sparing ◽  
Breast Reconstructive Surgery

Microsurgery in general has made dramatic improvements over the past decades. This applies to microsurgery in general and to breast reconstructive surgery especially. The demand for autologous breast reconstruction has risen. Since the introduction of the free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flaps, through the muscle-sparing TRAM, flaps designs have evolved into the current gold standard, the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. From experiences and increasing numbers of flap procedures performed by surgeons, techniques became more familiar and part of standard care. These factors gave rise to the development of a growing number of areas of the body where tissues of interest can be harvested using perforator flap-based techniques. This chapter discusses the most common as well as the ‘rising stars’ in terms of flaps to be used as alternative flaps to the DIEP flap for breast reconstruction. It discusses practical issues on dissection as well as donor site morbidity.

scholarly journals Our early experience in immediate total breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 4444
Author(s):  
Thyagaraj . ◽  
Ashrith Iyanahally ◽  
B. G. Tilak ◽  
M. E. Sham ◽  
Ganesh .
Keyword(s):  
Donor Site ◽  
Perforator Flap ◽  
Breast Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Diep Flap ◽  
Inferior Epigastric Artery ◽  
Aesthetic Result ◽  
Epigastric Artery ◽  
Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery ◽  
Artery Perforator

Background: As the breast cancer diagnosis has increased over recent years, patient have become more informative regarding treatment and reconstructive options, hence the expectation of the results will be very high. Reconstruction of breast with best result and less donor site morbidity is the target.Methods: A total of 20 cases were studied between January 2018 to January 2019 at our hospital to assess the outcome of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap for immediate breast reconstruction.Results: A total of twenty DIEP flaps were performed. Mean time required for flap harvest was 125 minutes, and time taken for flap inset was 110 minutes. There was no flap loss in any of the twenty cases. Two patients had fat necrosis. All patients were satisfied with aesthetic outcome.Conclusions: DIEP flap has good aesthetic result with less donor site morbidity.

scholarly journals The Deep Circumflex Iliac Artery Perforator Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Un lambeau perforateur de l’artère iliaque circonflexe profonde pour la reconstruction mammaire

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 229-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Elzinga ◽  
Edward Buchel
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Iliac Artery ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Perforator Flap ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Diep Flap ◽  
Deep Circumflex Iliac Artery ◽  
Epigastric Artery ◽  
Early Results ◽  
Aesthetic Results

Autologous breast reconstruction using abdominal-based perforator flaps produces excellent aesthetic results with minimal donor site morbidity. The superficial inferior epigastric artery and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps reliably perfuse a hemi-abdomen, up to the anterior axillary line. Beyond this line laterally, the flank or “love handle” tissue is primarily perfused by the deep circumflex iliac artery (DCIA) or secondarily by the superficial circumflex iliac artery. The flank tissue is a valuable addition to increase flap size when harvested with a DIEP flap or to provide vascularized tissue when the abdomen has been previously harvested. Harvesting the flank tissue in combination with the anterior abdominal tissue improves the contour of the trunk, accentuates the waist, and minimizes secondary revisions to excise prominent “dogears.” The DCIA flap is a novel technique for breast reconstruction. In this article, we describe our technique, pearls and pitfalls, and early results.

Anterior Intercostal Artery Perforator Flap as a Simple Technique for Partial Breast Reconstruction: Our Institutional Initial Experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 106 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 40-40
Author(s):  
R Amira Maher ◽  
Ahmed Gamal Eldin Osman ◽  
K Fahmy ◽  
Nouf M. Ebied ◽  
Reda Eissa
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Perforator Flap ◽  
Cosmetic Outcome ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Intercostal Artery ◽  
Breast Size ◽  
Cancer Management ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Artery Perforator

Background: The oncoplastic surgery has brought new dimensions to breast conserving surgery and added the aesthetic principles of breast surgery to breast cancer management. Recently there's a lot of volume replacement techniques without significant donor site morbidity .The anterior intercostal artery perforator (AICAP) flap is a suitable option in partial breast reconstruction for lower pole tumors in small and medium sized breasts. Objectives: The aim of this study is to report our clinical experience with anterior intercostal perforator flap in partial breast reconstruction Methodology: 25 cases were performed between April 2018 to June 2019 at in Ain shams university hospitals for selected patients with lower breast pole tumors with small and medium sized breast and other option like reduction mMDTmoplasty wasn't favorable for them. Results: A total of 25 patient were selected by the multidisplinary team at Ain shams university hospital for partial breast reconstruction with anterior intercostal artery perforator flap . The mean age of the cases was 45.68 with mean body mass index of 32.32. The mean operative time for the flap was 64 minutes while the hospital stay was ranging from 1-2 days .Follow-up for local recurrence was from 6 to 14 months. There was 1 case with wound complication (4%). The cosmetic outcome was assessed by the MDT and a giving score from 1-5 was used with 1 is the least favorable cosmetic outcome and 5 is the best result 76% of the cases scored 5, 14% scored 4, 8% scored 3. According to patient satisfaction a score from 1 to 5 was used with the score 1 is least satisfied and score 5 represents the most satisfaction level, there was 80% of the patient gave the score 5, 12% of the cases gave the score 4 and 8% of the cases gave the score 3 Conclusions: Based on our experience, partial breast reconstruction using AICAP flap is a reliable option for lower breast tumors in small-to-moderate breast size with perfect cosmetic outcome and negligible rate of complication.

Use of Indocyanine Green Imaging for Perforator Identification in Preexpanded Brachial Artery Perforator Flaps

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (05) ◽  
pp. 650-658
Author(s):  
Tinglu Han ◽  
Nima Khavanin ◽  
Mengqing Zang ◽  
Shan Zhu ◽  
Bo Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indocyanine Green ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Brachial Artery ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Perforator Flap ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Icg Angiography ◽  
Flap Design ◽  
Flap Elevation ◽  
Artery Perforator

AbstractThe tissues of the medial arm as a donor site for perforator flap design have several advantages. However, they are relatively underused with limited reports, partly due to unreliable perforator anatomy. Therefore, we aimed to review our preliminary experience using indocyanine green (ICG) angiography to design and elevate preexpanded pedicled brachial artery perforator (BAP) flaps for regional reconstruction. All patients underwent soft tissue reconstructions using a preexpanded BAP flap in two or three stages. ICG angiography was used to localize perforators during both expander insertion and flap elevation. The pedicle was divided at the third stage 3 weeks following flap elevation for head and neck cases. Sixteen patients underwent reconstructions of the head and neck (n = 13) or shoulder/trunk (n = 3) using 14 perforator-plus and 2 propeller BAP flaps. In total, 50 perforators were identified using ICG imaging, all of which were appreciable during both expander placement and flap elevation. Thirty-five perforators were directly visualized during flap elevation, and an additional 15 perforators were not explored but incorporated into the flap. All flaps survived without necrosis, and the donor sites healed uneventfully without complications. The medial arm provides thin and pliable skin for the resurfacing of regional defects with relatively minimal donor-site morbidity. With the assistance of ICG angiography, perforators of the brachial artery can be reliably identified, facilitating the preexpansion and elevation of pedicled BAP flaps for use in head–neck and trunk reconstruction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document