Dajiang Song1, Zan Li1, Yixin Zhang2, Bo Zhou1, Chunliu Lü1, Yuanyuan Tang1, Liang Yi1, Zhenhua Luo1. 1. Department of Oncology Plastic Surgery, Hunan Province Cancer Hospital, Changsha Hunan, 410008, P. R. China. 2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200011, P. R. China.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate if intercostal neurovascular perforator can nourish lower abdominal flap. Methods: Between June 2017 and December 2020, in 39 female patients with predominant perforator originated from intercostal nerve nutrient vessels, main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessels was chosen to be the pedicle to harvest free lower abdominal flap for breast reconstruction. The age of the patients ranged from 28 to 52 years, with an average of 38.6 years. There were 16 cases on the left and 23 cases on the right. The duration of breast cancer was 3-32 months, with an average of 21.8 months. Pathological stage was stageⅡin 31 cases and stage Ⅲ in 8 cases. Among them, 25 cases were primary tumor resection and one stage breast reconstruction and 14 cases were delayed breast reconstruction. Results: The lower abdominal flap pedicled with one side pedicle was harvested in 32 cases, all of which were supplied by the main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel combined with the intercostal neurovascular perforator; 7 cases were harvested with bilateral pedicled lower abdominal flaps, of which 4 cases were supplied by the main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel combined with intercostal neurovascular perforator on one side and deep inferior epigastric artery perforator on the other side, and the other 3 cases were supplied by bilateral main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel and the intercostal neurovascular perforator. In the flaps nourished with the main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel combined with the intercostal neurovascular perforator, the intercostal neurovascular perforators were one branch type in 15 cases, one branch+reticular type in 19 sides, and reticular type in 8 sides. The size of flap ranged from 26 cm×10 cm to 31 cm×13 cm; the thickness was 2.5-5.5 cm (mean, 2.9 cm); the vascular pedicle length was 7.0-11.5 cm (mean, 9.2 cm); the weight of the flap was 350-420 g (mean, 390 g). All the flaps survived completely and the incisions at donor sites healed by first intention. All patients were followed up 14-35 months (mean, 25.4 months). The shape, texture, and elasticity of reconstructed breasts were good and no flap contracture happened. Only linear scar left at the donor site, the function of abdomen was not affected. No local recurrence happened. Conclusion: When the direct perforator of the deep inferior epigastric artery may not provide reliable blood supply for the lower abdominal flap, the intercostal neurovascular perforator with deep inferior epigastric vessels can ensure the blood supply of the free lower abdominal flap.
Objective: To investigate if intercostal neurovascular perforator can nourish lower abdominal flap. Methods: Between June 2017 and December 2020, in 39 female patients with predominant perforator originated from intercostal nerve nutrient vessels, main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessels was chosen to be the pedicle to harvest free lower abdominal flap for breast reconstruction. The age of the patients ranged from 28 to 52 years, with an average of 38.6 years. There were 16 cases on the left and 23 cases on the right. The duration of breast cancer was 3-32 months, with an average of 21.8 months. Pathological stage was stageⅡin 31 cases and stage Ⅲ in 8 cases. Among them, 25 cases were primary tumor resection and one stage breast reconstruction and 14 cases were delayed breast reconstruction. Results: The lower abdominal flap pedicled with one side pedicle was harvested in 32 cases, all of which were supplied by the main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel combined with the intercostal neurovascular perforator; 7 cases were harvested with bilateral pedicled lower abdominal flaps, of which 4 cases were supplied by the main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel combined with intercostal neurovascular perforator on one side and deep inferior epigastric artery perforator on the other side, and the other 3 cases were supplied by bilateral main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel and the intercostal neurovascular perforator. In the flaps nourished with the main trunk of the deep inferior epigastric vessel combined with the intercostal neurovascular perforator, the intercostal neurovascular perforators were one branch type in 15 cases, one branch+reticular type in 19 sides, and reticular type in 8 sides. The size of flap ranged from 26 cm×10 cm to 31 cm×13 cm; the thickness was 2.5-5.5 cm (mean, 2.9 cm); the vascular pedicle length was 7.0-11.5 cm (mean, 9.2 cm); the weight of the flap was 350-420 g (mean, 390 g). All the flaps survived completely and the incisions at donor sites healed by first intention. All patients were followed up 14-35 months (mean, 25.4 months). The shape, texture, and elasticity of reconstructed breasts were good and no flap contracture happened. Only linear scar left at the donor site, the function of abdomen was not affected. No local recurrence happened. Conclusion: When the direct perforator of the deep inferior epigastric artery may not provide reliable blood supply for the lower abdominal flap, the intercostal neurovascular perforator with deep inferior epigastric vessels can ensure the blood supply of the free lower abdominal flap.