The delay procedure in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The delay procedure in DIEP flap breast reconstruction, in which the reduced-caliber choke vessels play a major role, can provide more well-perfused tissue than a standard DIEP flap. The aim of this study was to review our experience with this technique, to evaluate the indications, and to analyze the surgical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of all consecutive DIEP delay procedures performed between March 2019 and June 2021. Patient demographics, operative details, and complications were registered. Patients had preoperative imaging by MRA to select dominant perforators. The surgical technique involves a two-stage operation. During the first operation the flaps were pedicled on a dominant perforator and a lateral skin bridge extending towards the lateral flank and lumbar fat, and in a second stage the flap is harvested and transferred. RESULTS: A total of 82 extended DIEP delay procedures were performed to reconstruct 154 breasts. The majority were bilateral breast reconstructions (87.8%). The delay procedure was used for 38 primary reconstructions (46.3%) and 32 tertiary reconstructions (39.0%). The primary indication was the need for additional volume (79.3%), followed by extensive abdominal scarring and liposuction. After the first operation seroma was the most frequently observed complication (7.3%). After the second operation three total flap losses (1.9%) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The delay procedure in DIEP flap breast reconstruction results in the harvest of a good amount of abdominal tissue by adding a preliminary procedure. This technique can convert patients previously considered unsuitable into suitable candidates for abdominal-based breast reconstruction.

The Stacked Hemiabdominal Extended Perforator Flap for Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Options for bilateral autologous breast reconstruction in thin women are limited. The aim of this study was to introduce a novel approach to increase abdominal flap volume with the stacked hemiabdominal extended perforator (SHAEP) flap. The authors describe the surgical technique and analyze their results. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of all SHAEP flap breast reconstructions performed since February of 2014. Patient demographics, operative details, complications, and flap reexplorations were recorded. The bipedicled hemiabdominal flap was designed as a combination of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) and a second, more lateral pedicle: the deep or superficial circumflex iliac perforator vessels, the superficial inferior epigastric artery, or a lumbar artery or intercostal perforator. RESULTS: A total of 90 SHAEP flap breast reconstructions were performed in 49 consecutive patients. Median operative time was 500 minutes (range, 405 to 797 minutes). Median hemiabdominal flap weight that was used for reconstruction was 598 g (range, 160 to 1389 g). No total flap losses were recorded. Recipient-site complications included partial flap loss (2.2 percent), hematoma (3.3 percent), fat necrosis (2.2 percent), and wound problems (4.4 percent). Minor donor-site complications occurred in five patients (10.2 percent). Most flaps were harvested on a combination of the DIEP and deep circumflex iliac artery vessels. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the SHAEP flap is an excellent option for bilateral autologous breast reconstruction in women who require significant breast volume but have insufficient abdominal tissue for a bilateral DIEP flap. The bipedicled SHAEP flap allows for enhanced flap perfusion, increased volume, and abdominal contour improvement using a single abdominal donor site. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Breast Tissue Expanders with Magnetic Ports: Clinical Experience at 1.5 T.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate breast tissue expanders with magnetic ports for safety in patients undergoing abdominal/pelvic magnetic resonance angiography before autologous breast reconstruction. METHODS: Magnetic resonance angiography of the abdomen and pelvis at 1.5 T was performed in 71 patients in prone position with tissue expanders with magnetic ports labeled "MR Unsafe" from July of 2012 to May of 2014. Patients were monitored during magnetic resonance angiography for tissue expander-related symptoms, and the chest wall tissue adjacent to the tissue expander was examined for injury at the time of tissue expander removal for breast reconstruction. Retrospective review of these patients' clinical records was performed. T2-weighted fast spin echo, steady-state free precession and gadolinium-enhanced spoiled gradient echo sequences were assessed for image artifacts. RESULTS: No patient had tissue expander or magnetic port migration during the magnetic resonance examination and none reported pain during scanning. On tissue expander removal (71 patients, 112 implants), the surgeons reported no evidence of tissue damage, and there were no operative complications at those sites of breast reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Magnetic resonance angiography of the abdomen and pelvis in patients with certain breast tissue expanders containing magnetic ports can be performed safely at 1.5 T for pre-autologous flap breast reconstruction perforator vessel mapping. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Magnetic resonance angiography in perforator flap breast reconstruction.

Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is an extremely useful preoperative imaging test for evaluation of the vasculature of donor tissue to be used in autologous breast reconstruction. MRA has sufficient spacial resolution to reliably visualize 1 mm perforating vessels and to accurately locate vessels in reference to a patient's anatomic landmarks without exposing patients to ionizing radiation or iodinated contrast. The use of a blood pool contrast agent and the lack of radiation exposure allow multiple studies of multiple anatomic regions in one examination. The following article is a detailed description of our MRA protocol developed with our radiologists with examples that illustrate the utility of MRA in perforator flap breast reconstruction.

Autologous breast reconstruction: preoperative magnetic resonance angiography for perforator flap vessel mapping.

BACKGROUND: Selection of a vascular pedicle for autologous breast reconstruction is time consuming and depends on visual evaluation during the surgery. Preoperative imaging of donor site for mapping the perforator artery anatomy greatly improves the efficiency of perforator selection and significantly reduces the operative time. In this article, we present our experience with magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for perforator vessel mapping including MRA technique and interpretation. METHODS: We have performed over 400 MRA examinations from August 2008 to August 2013 at our institution for preoperative imaging of donor site for mapping the perforator vessel anatomy. Using our optimized imaging protocol with blood pool magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents, multiple donor sites can be imaged in a single MRA examination. Following imaging using the postprocessing and reporting tool, we estimated incidence of commonly used perforators for autologous breast reconstruction. RESULTS: In our practice, anterior abdominal wall tissue is the most commonly used donor site for perforator flap breast reconstruction and deep inferior epigastric artery perforators are the most commonly used vascular pedicle. A thigh flap, based on the profunda femoral artery perforator has become the second most used flap at our institution. In addition, MRA imaging also showed evidence of metastatic disease in 4% of our patient subset. CONCLUSION: Our MRA technique allows the surgeons to confidently assess multiple donor sites for the best perforator and flap design. In conclusion, a well-performed MRA with specific postprocessing provides an accurate method for mapping perforator vessel, at the same time avoiding ionizing radiation.

Microlymphatic surgery for the treatment of iatrogenic lymphedema.

Lymphedema is a chronic and progressive condition that occurs after cancer treatment. Autologous lymph node transplant, or microsurgical vascularized lymph node transfer (ALNT), is a surgical treatment option that brings vascularized vascular endothelial growth factor-C-producing tissue into the operated field to promote lymphangiogenesis and bridge the distal obstructed lymphatic system with the proximal lymphatic system. Operative techniques for upper- and lower-extremity ALNT are described with 3 donor lymph node flaps (inguinal, thoracic, cervical). Surgical technique is described for the combination of ALNT with abdominal flaps and nonabdominal flaps. Imaging showing restoration of lymphatic drainage after ALNT is shown.

Gadofosveset trisodium-enhanced abdominal perforator MRA.

PURPOSE: To compare image quality including the number of perforators visualized, vessel contrast ratios, and vessel sharpness with blood pool and extracellular contrast agents in abdominal perforator flap magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative perforator flap MRA was performed prone on 64 consecutive patients undergoing breast reconstruction (32 receiving 20 mL gadobenate dimeglumine and 32 receiving 10 mL gadofosveset trisodium) on transverse 3D fat-suppressed spoiled gradient echo images using high spatial resolution. Image quality was assessed qualitatively on a 4-point scale. On a computer workstation the number of perforators visualized was counted, arterial, venous, muscle, fat, and abdominal perforator signal intensities were measured to calculate signal intensity and contrast ratios, and vessel sharpness was evaluated. RESULTS: The qualitative image quality score was higher for gadofosveset (2.7) than gadobenate (2.0) and CTA (2.0). The mean number of perforators visualized with gadofosveset was 6.8 on right and 10.4 on left compared to 4.6 on right and 6.6 on left for gadobenate (P < 0.0001). The artery-to-fat contrast ratio was comparable, suggesting the difference was not related to magnitude of enhancement. Perforator-to-muscle contrast ratio was greater for gadofosveset, 2.3, compared to gadobenate 1.5 (P = 0.002). Vessel sharpness was also greater for gadofosveset (P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Perforator MRA image quality including number of perforators visualized, perforator-to-muscle contrast, and vessel sharpness is higher with gadofosveset trisodium compared with gadobenate dimeglumine.

Deep femoral artery perforator flap: a new perforator flap for breast reconstruction.

We present the deep femoral artery perforator (DFAP) flap, a new perforator flap for breast reconstruction, with a detailed description of operative technique and four clinical examples. The DFAP flap allows harvest of tissue from the lower buttock and lateral thigh with similar territory to an in-the-crease inferior gluteal artery perforator (IGAP) flap but based on a different perforator. When present, the DFAP is the largest vessel supplying this territory and is often septocutaneous, facilitating dissection when compared with the IGAP flap. We used preoperative imaging with magnetic resonance angiography to assist in accurate flap planning which also permitted precise determination of perforator origin. In patients with either a contraindication to abdominal wall-based perforator flaps or weight distribution below the waist, the DFAP flap provides an alternative to the IGAP flap with an excellent pedicle and a favorable location on the lateral thigh.

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography.

With technological advances in magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), spatial resolution of 1-mm perforating vessels can reliably be visualized and accurately located in reference to patients' anatomic landmarks without exposing patients to ionizing radiation or iodinated contrast, resulting in optimal perforator selection, improved flap design, and increased surgical efficiency. As their experience with MRA in breast reconstruction has increased, the authors have made changes to their MRA protocol that allow imaging of the vasculature in multiple donor sites (buttock, abdomen, and upper thigh) in one study. This article provides details of this experience with multiple donor site contrast-enhanced MRA.

Perforator flap magnetic resonance angiography for reconstructive breast surgery: a review of 25 deep inferior epigastric and gluteal perforator artery flap patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for preoperative mapping of rectus and gluteal muscle perforating arteries prior to autologous flap breast reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative MRA on 25 consecutive patients undergoing perforator artery-based autologous breast reconstruction was performed at 1.5 T using 3D liver accelerate volume acquisition (LAVA) of abdominal or gluteal regions acquired during injection of 20 mL of gadobenate dimeglumine with bolus timing optimized using MR fluoroscopy or SmartPrep. Perforator artery size and coordinates relative to umbilicus or top of gluteal crease on 3D MRA were compared to findings at surgery. Reconstructed breast volume estimates from MRA were also compared to weights at harvesting. RESULTS: In all, 132 perforator arteries were found at surgery to be located within 1 cm of the coordinates measured on MRA and were surgically verified to be suitable for flap perfusion. Surgery verified the arterial course and caliber through the rectus and gluteal muscles visualized on MRA in 48 of 49 arteries. Volume rendering of 3D MRA predicted a breast reconstruction volume with a mean difference of 47 g compared to measurements at harvesting. CONCLUSION: MRA accurately maps rectus and gluteal muscle perforator arteries for preoperative planning of autologous flaps for breast reconstruction.

Anatomic imaging of gluteal perforator flaps without ionizing radiation: seeing is believing with magnetic resonance angiography.

Preoperative imaging is essential for abdominal perforator flap breast reconstruction because it allows for preoperative perforator selection, resulting in improved operative efficiency and flap design. The benefits of visualizing the vasculature preoperatively also extend to gluteal artery perforator flaps. Initially, our practice used computed tomography angiography (CTA) to image the gluteal vessels. However, with advances in magnetic resonance imaging angiography (MRA), perforating vessels of 1-mm diameter can reliably be visualized without exposing patients to ionizing radiation or iodinated intravenous contrast. In our original MRA protocol to image abdominal flaps, we found the accuracy of MRA compared favorably with CTA. With our increased experience with MRA, we decided to use MRA to image gluteal flaps. Technical changes were made to the MRA protocol to improve image quality and extend the field of view. Using our new MRA protocol, we can image the vasculature of the buttock, abdomen, and upper thigh in one study. We have found that the spatial resolution of MRA is sufficient to accurately map gluteal perforating vessels, as well as provide information on vessel caliber and course. This article details our experience with preoperative imaging for gluteal perforator flap breast reconstruction.

Anatomic imaging of abdominal perforator flaps without ionizing radiation: seeing is believing with magnetic resonance imaging angiography.

The tremendous variability of the inferior epigastric arterial system makes accurate imaging of the vasculature of the anterior abdominal wall an essential component of optimal perforator selection. Preoperative imaging of the abdominal vasculature allows for preoperative perforator selection, resulting in improved operative efficiency and flap design. Abdominal wall perforators of 1-mm diameter can be reliably visualized without exposing patients to ionizing radiation or iodinated intravenous contrast through advances in magnetic resonance imaging angiography (MRA). In this study, MRA imaging was performed on 31 patients who underwent 50 abdominal flaps. For each flap, the location, relative to the umbilicus, of the three largest perforators on both the left and right sides of the abdomen was determined with MRA. Vessel diameter and anatomic course were also evaluated. Postoperatively, a survey was completed by the surgeon to assess the accuracy of the MRA with respect to the intraoperative findings. All perforators visualized on MRA were found at surgery (0% false-positive). In 2 of 50 flaps, the surgeon transferred a flap based upon a vessel not visualized on the MRA (4% false-negative). This article details our experience with MRA as a reliable preoperative imaging technique for abdominal perforator flap breast reconstruction.

Perforator flaps: recent experience, current trends, and future directions based on 3974 microsurgical breast reconstructions.

Perforator flap breast reconstruction is an accepted surgical option for breast cancer patients electing to restore their body image after mastectomy. Since the introduction of the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap, microsurgical techniques have evolved to support a 99 percent success rate for a variety of flaps with donor sites that include the abdomen, buttock, thigh, and trunk. Recent experience highlights the perforator flap as a proven solution for patients who have experienced failed breast implant-based reconstructions or those requiring irradiation. Current trends suggest an application of these techniques in patients previously felt to be unacceptable surgical candidates with a focus on safety, aesthetics, and increased sensitization. Future challenges include the propagation of these reconstructive techniques into the hands of future plastic surgeons with a focus on the development of septocutaneous flaps and vascularized lymph node transfers for the treatment of lymphedema.

Simultaneous bilateral breast reconstruction with in-the-crease inferior gluteal artery perforator flaps.

The inferior gluteal artery perforator (IGAP) free flap represents an alternative technique for autogenous breast reconstruction in patients with insufficient abdominal donor tissue. Historically, patients underwent a staged approach for bilateral breast reconstruction with the IGAP because it is technically demanding and can be time consuming. The bilateral simultaneous IGAP can be performed effectively with 2 microsurgeons operating together. This is a retrospective study of 22 patients (44 flaps) who underwent bilateral breast reconstruction with bilateral IGAP flaps in one operation between January 2005 and December 2007. The following parameters were evaluated and compared to our published data with unilateral IGAP flap reconstruction: operating time, blood loss, flap weight, hospital length of stay, and perioperative complications. A follow-up patient survey was also conducted to gauge patient's satisfaction with the donor site and procedure. The flap survival rate was 100%. Complications included 1 patient with 1 flap with partial fat necrosis, 2 patients who required reoperation for venous congestion, 1 patient with a hematoma, 2 patients with delayed buttock wound healing, 2 patients requiring resuturing for buttock wound dehiscence, and 1 patient with resolved paresthesias. The majority of patients were satisfied with the procedure and donor site. In this study, we detail our experience with the inferior gluteal region as a reliable source of donor tissue and the simultaneous bilateral IGAP flap as an efficient method of breast reconstruction.

Breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap: 3.0-T gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging for preoperative localization of abdominal wall perforators.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate 3.0-T gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for localization of inferior epigastric artery (IEA) perforators before reconstructive breast surgery involving a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was exempt from institutional review board approval, and the requirement for informed patient consent was waived. Data were collected and stored in compliance with HIPAA regulations. Nineteen patients (mean age, 46.3 years) underwent three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced 3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen before undergoing DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Up to four of the largest perforators arising from the IEA on each side of the umbilicus were identified. The diameter, intramuscular course, and distance from the umbilicus of each perforator were recorded. One of the marked perforators on each side was labeled "the best" on the basis of an optimal combination of perforator features: diameter, intramuscular course, and location with respect to the flap edges. MR findings were compared with intraoperative findings. The two-tailed Student t test was used to compare the mean diameters of all perforators with the mean diameters of the perforators labeled as the best. RESULTS: There were 30 surgical flaps, and 11 (58%) of the 19 patients underwent bilateral flap dissection. At surgery, 122 perforators were localized, and 118 (97%) of these perforators-with a mean diameter of 1.1 mm (range, 0.8-1.6 mm)-had been identified at preoperative MR imaging. Thirty perforators with a mean diameter of 1.4 mm (range, 1.0-1.6 mm) were labeled as the best at MR imaging. Thirty-three perforators were harvested intraoperatively, and all of these had been localized preoperatively. Twenty-eight (85%) of these 33 perforators were labeled as the best at MR imaging. CONCLUSION: Gadolinium-enhanced 3.0-T MR imaging can be used to accurately localize IEA perforators and to select the optimal perforator to be harvested for DIEP flap reconstructive breast surgery.

Breast reconstruction with perforator flaps.

BACKGROUND: Perforator flaps represent the latest in the evolution of soft-tissue flaps. They allow the transfer of the patient's own skin and fat in a reliable manner, with minimal donor-site morbidity. The powerful perforator flap concept allows transfer of tissue from numerous, well-described donor sites to almost any distant site with suitable recipient vessels. Large-volume flaps can be supported reliably with perforators from areas such as the abdomen, buttock, or flank and transferred microsurgically for breast reconstruction. INDICATIONS: The ideal tissue for breast reconstruction is fat with or without skin, not implants or muscle. Absolute contraindications specific to perforator flaps in the authors' practice include history of previous liposuction of the donor site, some previous donor-site surgery, or active smoking (within 1 month before surgery). TECHNIQUE: Perforator flaps are supplied by blood vessels that arise from named, axial vessels and perforate through or around overlying muscles and septa to vascularize the overlying skin and fat. During flap harvest, these perforators are meticulously dissected free from the surrounding muscle, which is spread in the direction of the muscle fibers and preserved intact. The pedicle is anastomosed to recipient vessels in the chest, and the donor site is closed without the use of mesh. CONCLUSION: Perforator flaps allow for safe, reliable tissue transfer from a variety of sites and provide ideal tissue for breast reconstruction, with minimal donor-site morbidity.

Congenital breast deformity reconstruction using perforator flaps.

BACKGROUND: Congenital breast deformities such as Poland syndrome, unilateral congenital hypoplasia, tuberous breast anomaly, and amastia pose a challenging plastic surgical dilemma. The majority of patients are young, healthy individuals who seek esthetic restoration of their breast deformities. Currently, both implant and autologous reconstructive techniques are used. This study focuses on our experience with congenital breast deformity patients who underwent reconstruction using a perforator flap. METHODS: From 1994 to 2005, a retrospective chart review was performed on women who underwent breast reconstruction using perforator flaps to correct congenital breast deformities and asymmetry. Patient age, breast deformity type, perforator flap type, flap volume, recipient vessels, postoperative complications, revisions, and esthetic results were determined. RESULTS: Over an 11-year period, 12 perforator flaps were performed. All cases were for unilateral breast deformities. The patients ranged from 16 to 43 years of age. Six patients had undergone previous correctional surgeries. Eight (n = 8) flaps were used for correction of Poland syndrome and its associated chest wall deformities. Four (n = 4) flaps were used for correction of unilateral breast hypoplasia. In all cases, the internal mammary vessels were the recipient vessels of choice. No flaps were lost. No vein grafts were used. All patients were discharged on the fourth postoperative day. Complications encountered included seroma, hematoma, and nipple malposition. Revisional surgery was performed in 30% of the cases. Esthetic results varied from poor to excellent. CONCLUSIONS: Perforator flaps are an acceptable choice for patients with congenital breast deformities seeking autologous breast reconstruction. Deep inferior epigastric artery (DIEP) or superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps are performed when adequate abdominal tissue is available; however, many young patients have inadequate abdominal tissue, thus a GAP flap can be used. Perforator flaps are a safe, reliable surgical technique. In the properly selected patient, donor-site morbidity and functional compromise are minimized, improved self-esteem is noted, postoperative pain is decreased, and excellent long-term esthetic results can be achieved.

Gluteal artery perforator flaps.

Perforator flaps have allowed the transfer of a patient's own skin and fat in a reliable manner with minimal donor site morbidity for more than a decade. They represent the latest in the evolution of soft tissue flaps and provide the reconstructive microsurgeon with more freedom to select a donor site that matches the skin color, thickness, texture, and subcutaneous fat quality of the recipient site. More attention can be paid to the aesthetic quality of the reconstruction. This article focuses on buttock flaps for breast reconstruction and covers aspects such as patient evaluation, selection, preparation, surgical technique, and complications of superior gluteal artery perforator and inferior gluteal artery perforator flaps.