A Closer Look at Delayed Primary Cleft Surgery and Unrepaired Cleft Lip and/or Palate in 5 UK Cleft Centers.

BACKGROUND: There may be many reasons for delays to primary cleft surgery. Our aim was to investigate the age of children undergoing primary cleft lip or primary cleft palate repair in 5 cleft centers within the United Kingdom. Identify the reasons for delayed primary cleft lip repair (beyond 6 months) and delayed primary palate repair (beyond 13 months). Identify children who had a cleft lip and/or palate (CL±P) that was intentionally unrepaired and the reasons for this. METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter review of patients born with a CL±P between December 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016. Three regional cleft centers, comprising of 5 cleft administrative units in the United Kingdom participated. RESULTS: In all, 1826 patients with CL±P were identified. Of them, 120 patients had delayed lip repair, outside the expected standard of 183 days. And, 178 patients in total had delayed palate repair, outside the expected standard of 396 days. Twenty (1%) patients had an unrepaired cleft palate. CONCLUSIONS: This large retrospective review highlights variations between centers regarding the timing of lip and palate surgery and details the reasons stated for delayed primary surgery. A small number of patients with an unrepaired cleft palate were identified. All had complex medical problems or comorbidities listed as a reason for the decision not to operate and 50% had a syndromic diagnosis. The number of patients receiving delayed surgery due to comorbidities, being underweight or prematurity, highlights the importance of the cleft specialist nurse and pediatrician within the cleft multidisciplinary team.

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography for preoperative imaging of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps: advantages and disadvantages compared with computed tomography angiography: a United Kingdom perspective.

The anatomy of the anterior abdominal wall is highly variable and leads to uncertainty when harvesting a deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap. Presurgical imaging has been shown to reduce the operating time, as well as reduce the rates of flap and donor site complications. The importance of imaging of the venous system has also been recognized for reducing the risk of venous congestion. The modalities currently available for presurgical imaging include handheld Doppler ultrasound, duplex ultrasound, computed tomographic angiography (CTA), and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA). Of these, the most promising are CTA and CE-MRA, and advantages and disadvantages exist for both modalities. In this article, we review the use of CE-MRA for preoperative flap imaging and report our experience with its use in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap harvest, as well as compare it with CTA. We also explore the future directions for presurgical flap imaging.

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography for preoperative imaging in DIEP flap breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography has been shown to be very accurate for identifying the perforator size, location, and intramuscular course, and the associated venous system, without exposing the patient to ionizing radiation. This study reports the authors' experience using this imaging modality in a large patient series. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who had undergone preoperative contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography followed by free abdominal flap breast reconstruction was conducted. The results of imaging were compared with intraoperative findings, and surgical outcomes were compared with scan data. The results were compared with control data in patients who did not undergo presurgical imaging. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two patients underwent contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography presurgical imaging, and the results were compared with 84 controls. The imaging was found to be accurate for evaluating the perforator anatomy for free abdominal flap planning, with a high concordance between imaging and intraoperative findings. Without presurgical angiography, the ratio of deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap-to-free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap harvest was 0.9:1; with presurgical imaging, the ratio was 1.6:1 (p < 0.05). With presurgical angiography, there was a mean reduction in operating time of 26 minutes for unilateral DIEP flap harvest and 40 minutes for bilateral harvest, although these values were not significant. There was a significant reduction in the partial flap failure rate with preoperative imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Presurgical imaging using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography demonstrates a high concordance with intraoperative findings. In this series, the percentage of flaps that were raised as DIEP flaps was significantly increased in patients who underwent preoperative imaging, and the partial flap failure rate was significantly reduced. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: : Therapeutic, III.(Figure is included in full-text article.).

Relationship between venous congestion and intraflap venous anatomy in DIEP flaps using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography.

BACKGROUND: Deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap harvest is associated with a significant rate of venous congestion; however, the reason for this has not yet been fully explained. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography enables detailed evaluation of both the arterial and venous anatomies. METHODS: A retrospective review of DIEP flaps that underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography was performed. Outcomes were compared with preoperative radiologic reporting of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiographic imaging, and anatomical data from the scans were also analyzed. RESULTS: Review of 54 DIEP flaps with venous system reporting was performed. Seven DIEP flaps suffered venous congestion, all of which were raised on perforators without direct connections between the venae comitantes and the main arborization of the superficial inferior epigastric vein. In the 47 DIEP flaps without venous congestion, 46 were raised on at least one perforator with a direct venous connection between the perforator venae comitantes and the main arborizations of the superficial inferior epigastric vein. There was an extremely significant association between the absence of a direct connection with the perforator venae comitantes on magnetic resonance angiography and the occurrence of venous congestion (p < 0.0001). Sixty-eight percent of all perforators had direct venous connections, which were significantly more likely to be located in the medial row. CONCLUSIONS: DIEP flaps elevated on perforators with venae comitantes with direct venous connections to the main arborization of the superficial inferior epigastric vein are significantly associated with a very low incidence of flap venous congestion. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography allows detailed appraisal of the venous anatomy, which may minimize the risk of DIEP flap venous insufficiency and the need for salvage procedures.