INTRODUCTION: This article aims to investigate the critical role of the venous-perforator in the decision-making process of choosing the best suitable perforator-complex in a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. METHODS: Forty consecutive DIEP breast reconstructions were pre-operatively evaluated by CT-Angiography to identify the dominant and centrally located abdominal wall perforators. The CTA results were used as a guide to conduct a Color-Duplex-Ultrasound examination that was mainly focused on investigating the accompanying venous-perforator. In group-A (n = 20) perforator-complex selection was based on the size of the arterial-perforator, whilst in group-B (n = 20) it was based on the size of the venous-perforator. RESULTS: All single perforator-complex DIEP flaps survived. No significant differences were recorded concerning the size of arterial-perforator between the two groups; however the size of venous-perforator was significantly larger in group-B (P < 0.05). In group-A, four flaps showed vascular compromise intraoperative that was salvaged by flap supercharge with the superficial inferior epigastric system. In contrast, in group-B, all flaps were re-vascularized uneventfully (P < 0.05). Physical examination revealed a palpable mass in one patient and ultrasound investigation added three cases with a firm area of scar tissue in group-A, but no fat necrosis was detected in group-B (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The CTA-guided duplex ultrasonography could direct the perforator-complex selection according to the size of the venous-perforator, and may reduce the intraoperative problems and the incidence of fat necrosis.
INTRODUCTION: This article aims to investigate the critical role of the venous-perforator in the decision-making process of choosing the best suitable perforator-complex in a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. METHODS: Forty consecutive DIEP breast reconstructions were pre-operatively evaluated by CT-Angiography to identify the dominant and centrally located abdominal wall perforators. The CTA results were used as a guide to conduct a Color-Duplex-Ultrasound examination that was mainly focused on investigating the accompanying venous-perforator. In group-A (n = 20) perforator-complex selection was based on the size of the arterial-perforator, whilst in group-B (n = 20) it was based on the size of the venous-perforator. RESULTS: All single perforator-complex DIEP flaps survived. No significant differences were recorded concerning the size of arterial-perforator between the two groups; however the size of venous-perforator was significantly larger in group-B (P < 0.05). In group-A, four flaps showed vascular compromise intraoperative that was salvaged by flap supercharge with the superficial inferior epigastric system. In contrast, in group-B, all flaps were re-vascularized uneventfully (P < 0.05). Physical examination revealed a palpable mass in one patient and ultrasound investigation added three cases with a firm area of scar tissue in group-A, but no fat necrosis was detected in group-B (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The CTA-guided duplex ultrasonography could direct the perforator-complex selection according to the size of the venous-perforator, and may reduce the intraoperative problems and the incidence of fat necrosis.
Authors: Vivian B Boer; Jan J van Wingerden; Carolien F Wever; Joost J Kardux; Michiel R Beets; Hester J van der Zaag-Loonen; Willem J Theuvenet Journal: Gland Surg Date: 2017-12