Abdominal Plication for Better Cosmetic Outcomes During Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP) for breast reconstruction is a widely accepted technique for breast reconstruction. Secondary benefit of this technique is abdominal contour improvement. Because of direct access, abdominal plication can be performed at the time of abdominal closure. Our goal was to investigate if this addition affected the complications. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on all DIEP flap reconstructions performed by a single surgeon at a cancer center, from March 2011 through February 2020. Presence of abdominal plication, age, and body mass index were compared with reoperation due to abdominal wound or hernia, procedure length in minutes, and length of stay. The association between the dependent and independent variables for the unadjusted and adjusted analysis was performed using the binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-eight DIEP flaps performed on 233 patients for breast reconstruction were analyzed. Flap loss was 1.7%. Abdominal plication was performed in 178 flaps (49.7%) and not performed in 180 flaps (50.3%). Thirty-nine percent were immediate; 61% were delayed. The results did not show a statistically significant association between abdominal plication and the need to reoperate (P = 0.3). Results from the adjusted analysis (age, body mass index) also did not show a significant association between the plication, need to reoperate, procedure duration, or hospital stay (P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal plication can improve cosmetic outcomes without increasing the duration of surgery, hospital stay, or reoperation rates due to abdominal complications. Therefore, it can be a valuable addition in DIEP flap breast reconstructions.

How Big Is Too Big?: The Effect of Defect Size on Postoperative Complications of Vertical Rectus Abdominis Flap Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous (VRAM) flap has been frequently used for perineal reconstruction given the high potential for wound complications associated with direct closure of this area. However, the relationship between defect size and postoperative complications remains undefined. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of the last 20 years for VRAM flaps was performed. Defect size, age, body mass index (BMI), cause of defect, sex, radiation, and flap donor laterality were recorded. Complications of infection, partial flap loss, total flap loss, minor wounds, treated nonoperatively, and major wound, which required reoperation, were analyzed with respect to defect size. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the demographic and clinical characteristics of the included patients. Associations were assessed using binary logistic regression analysis, and difference in means for compared groups was assessed using the independent samples t test. P values were set at 5% for all comparisons. RESULTS: There were 65 patients with VRAM flaps identified during the review period. Mean defect size was 204.71 cm2. Mean age was 63.97, and mean BMI was 27.18. History of prior radiation was noted in 90.77% of patients (n = 59). When adjusted for age and BMI, mean defect area was significantly different for patients with minor or major wounds. Larger perineal defects were associated with increased risk of major wound complications (odds ratio, 1.012; 95% confidence interval, 1.003-1.022). CONCLUSIONS: The vertical rectus abdominis flap has been a workhorse flap for perineal reconstruction. Defect size does not affect risk of partial flap necrosis, complete flap loss, infection, abdominal fascial dehiscence, ventral hernia, or seroma, which supports the utility of VRAM flap for perineal reconstruction. Larger perineal defects are associated with increased risk for major wound complications, which required reoperation, regardless of age or BMI. Future studies should be performed to determine if there is a maximum defect size cutoff that limits the utility of VRAM flap reconstruction or to develop a predictive model to assess the risk of major wound complications based on defect size.