Three- and Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography Angiographic Studies of Commonly Used Abdominal Flaps in Breast Reconstruction

2009 ◽  
Vol 124 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corrine Wong ◽  
Michel Saint-Cyr ◽  
Gary Arbique ◽  
Stephen Becker ◽  
Spencer Brown ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Greige ◽  
Bryce Liu ◽  
David Nash ◽  
Katie E. Weichman ◽  
Joseph A. Ricci

Abstract Background Accurate flap weight estimation is crucial for preoperative planning in microsurgical breast reconstruction; however, current flap weight estimation methods are time consuming. It was our objective to develop a parsimonious and accurate formula for the estimation of abdominal-based free flap weight. Methods Patients who underwent hemi-abdominal-based free tissue transfer for breast reconstruction at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Subcutaneous tissue thicknesses were measured on axial computed tomography angiograms at several predetermined points. Multivariable linear regression was used to generate the parsimonious flap weight estimation model. Split-sample validation was used to for internal validation. Results A total of 132 patients (196 flaps) were analyzed, with a mean body mass index of 31.2 ± 4.0 kg/m2 (range: 22.6–40.7). The mean intraoperative flap weight was 990 ± 344 g (range: 368–2,808). The full predictive model (R 2 = 0.68) estimated flap weight using the Eq. 91.3x + 36.4y + 6.2z – 1030.0, where x is subcutaneous tissue thickness (cm) 5 cm lateral to midline at the level of the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS), y is distance (cm) between the skin overlying each ASIS, and z is patient weight (kg). Two-thirds split-sample validation was performed using 131 flaps to build a model and the remaining 65 flaps for validation. Upon validation, we observed a median percent error of 10.2% (interquartile range [IQR]: 4.5–18.5) and a median absolute error of 108.6 g (IQR: 45.9–170.7). Conclusion We developed and internally validated a simple and accurate formula for the preoperative estimation of hemi-abdominal-based free flap weight for breast reconstruction.


2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (01) ◽  
pp. 050-055
Author(s):  
Aditya V. Kanoi ◽  
Karnav B. Panchal ◽  
Saugata Sen ◽  
Gautam Biswas

ABSTRACT Context: The internal mammary artery perforator vessels (IMPV) as a recipient in free flap breast reconstruction offer advantages over the more commonly used thoracodorsal vessels and the internal mammary vessels (IMV). Aims: This study was designed to assess the anatomical consistency of the IMPV and the suitability of these vessels for use as recipients in free flap breast reconstruction. Patients and Methods: Data from ten randomly selected female patients who did not have any chest wall or breast pathology but had undergone a computed tomography angiography (CTA) for unrelated diagnostic reasons from April 2013 to October 2013 were analysed. Retrospective data of seven patients who had undergone mastectomy for breast cancer and had been primarily reconstructed with a deep inferior epigastric artery perforator free flap transfer using the IMPV as recipient vessels were studied. Results: The CTA findings showed that the internal mammary perforator was consistently present in all cases bilaterally. In all cases, the dominant perforator arose from the upper four intercostal spaces (ICS) with the majority (55%) arising from the 2nd ICS. The mean distance of the perforators from the sternal border at the level of pectoralis muscle surface on the right side was 1.86 cm (range: 0.9–2.5 cm) with a mode value of 1.9 cm. On the left side, a mean of 1.77 cm (range: 1.5–2.1 cm) and a mode value of 1.7 cm were observed. Mean perforator artery diameters on the right and left sides were 2.2 mm and 2.4 mm, respectively. Conclusions: Though the internal mammary perforators are anatomically consistent, their use as recipients in free tissue transfer for breast reconstruction eventually rests on multiple variables.


2019 ◽  
Vol 143 (3) ◽  
pp. 667-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dunya M. Atisha ◽  
Kristen M. Tessiatore ◽  
Christel N. Rushing ◽  
Deniz Dayicioglu ◽  
Andrea Pusic ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 143 (6) ◽  
pp. 1144e-1150e ◽  
Author(s):  
Arash Momeni ◽  
Sarah C. Sorice ◽  
Alexander Y. Li ◽  
Dung H. Nguyen ◽  
Christopher Pannucci

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document