Immediate Breast Reconstruction with a Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap in the Lithotomy Position.

Mastectomy and flap harvesting can be accomplished simultaneously in immediate deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. However, this is not always possible, particularly in a teaching institution, where supervisors, trainees, and assistants must participate in the surgery, because there is not enough working space for breast and plastic surgeons to perform surgery together. We attempted to overcome this problem by placing the patient in the lithotomy position and have reported the outcomes. We evaluated patients who underwent unilateral immediate DIEP flap breast reconstruction in the supine or lithotomy position between October 2014 and July 2016. The surgeries were performed by the same inexperienced plastic surgeon in our hospital. In the lithotomy position, 1 plastic surgeon stands between the patient's legs and 1 stands beside the abdomen, and they perform DIEP flap harvesting simultaneously with mastectomy performed by 3 breast surgeons. After mastectomy, breast reconstruction is performed by 4 plastic surgeons. The supine position was used in the first 8 patients, and the lithotomy position was used in the following 8 patients. The mean operative time was 11 hours 21 minutes in the supine group and 8 hours 52 minutes in the lithotomy group, with a significant difference (P = 0.027). Breast reconstruction with a DIEP flap in the lithotomy position is useful for teaching institutions because it provides sufficient working space and allows simultaneous procedures without prolonging operative time. However, issues such as pressure sores, nerve palsy, and difficulty in patient placement still exist.

Breast reconstruction using free medial circumflex femoral artery perforator flaps: intraoperative anatomic study and clinical results [corrected].

BACKGROUND: A free fascioadipocutaneous flap obtained from the medial thigh is suitable for breast reconstruction in Asian women with a small-to-moderate breast size. In this region, both a medial circumflex femoral artery perforator flap (MCFAp flap) and a posterior medial thigh perforator flap (PMTp flap) are options, based on perforators from the deep femoral vessels. Here, we evaluated the anatomic basis of the medial circumflex femoral artery (MCFA) perforators from the medial circumflex femoral vessels. METHODS: Between July 2010 and June 2014, 53 patients (55 flaps) underwent breast reconstruction using a fascioadipocutaneous flap from the medial thigh. MCFA perforators larger than or equal to 0.5 mm in this region were investigated. The following parameters were recorded intraoperatively: number of perforators, perforator locations, distance of the perforating point from the proximal thigh crease and anterior border of the gracilis muscle. RESULTS: The total number of perforators was 131, with a mean of 2.4. The number of perforators coursing through the gracilis muscle (gracilis perforators) was the largest, followed by septocutaneous perforator coursing between the adductor longus and gracilis muscle. The average perforating point was located 6.5 cm below the proximal thigh crease and 2.2 cm from the anterior border of the gracilis muscle. Of the 102 procedures performed since 2006, 15 flaps were elevated as MCFAp flaps and there was no major complication. CONCLUSIONS: In some cases, MCFA perforators are dominant in this region compared to PMT perforators. A perforator map can be helpful for identifying adequate MCFA perforators intraoperatively.

Unilateral breast reconstruction using bilateral inferior gluteal artery perforator flaps.

BACKGROUND: For reconstructing moderate-to-high projection breasts in nulliparous patients with insufficient abdominal tissue or prior abdominal surgeries, a unilateral inferior gluteal artery perforator (IGAP) flap is an alternative procedure. In patients with slim hips, however, unilateral gluteal tissue is insufficient and inferior gluteal crease displacement may develop postoperatively. Donor-site asymmetry is also a major disadvantage. In these circumstances, bilateral IGAP flaps provide sufficient tissue without significant gluteal deformity. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 20 patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction using bilateral IGAP flaps by a single surgeon between November 2007 and December 2012. A quantitative outcome assessment was performed and compared with that of 22 unilateral IGAP flap patients operated on by the same surgeon. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent reconstruction with 40 IGAP flaps. Of the 40 flaps, 39 survived and 1 developed total necrosis due to repeated venous thrombosis. In 15 of 20 patients, the size of reconstructed breast was comparable to that of the contralateral breast. Final inset flap weight was 462.3 g for bilateral flaps and 244.3 g for unilateral flaps. Total operating time was 671.1 minutes (bilateral flaps) and 486.8 minutes (unilateral flaps). CONCLUSIONS: Use of bilateral IGAP flaps for breast reconstruction helps to avoid asymmetry of the inferior buttock volume and shape. Bilateral flaps provide sufficient tissue volume and allow for reconstruction of a breast comparable to the unaffected side. In patients with moderate-to-high projection breast whose abdominal tissue cannot be used for reconstruction, IGAP flaps may be a suitable alternative.