Download PDF
J Reconstr Microsurg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2320-5489
Original Article

Volumetric Analysis of a Novel Chimeric Gracilis and Profunda Artery Perforator Flap

Nicole R. Van Spronsen
1   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
,
Jacob B. Hammond
2   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado
,
Alexander T. Plonkowski
2   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado
,
Clint E. Jokerst
3   School of Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom
,
Jonathan A. Flug
3   School of Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom
,
Max A. Shrout
1   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
,
Edward M. Reece
1   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
,
William J. Casey III
1   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
,
Alanna M. Rebecca
1   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The presence of a chimeric gracilis and profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap with a common arterial pedicle has been demonstrated on computed tomography angiography in up to 59% of patients and confirmed in a cadaveric model. Already utilized for head and neck reconstruction by Heredero et al, this novel flap could provide more volume than either flap alone which is advantageous, particularly in patients with sizable defects. The purpose of this study was to determine the average tissue volume that can be utilized from this chimeric flap.

Methods CT Angiogram imaging studies exhibiting chimeric flap anatomy were reviewed over a 7-year period at a single institution utilizing Visage Version 7.1, a radiology picture archiving and communication system. This software was used to trace the flap pedicles and to capture estimated soft tissue volumes of each respective flap.

Results A total of 31 patients, consisting of 52 lower extremity gracilis and PAP chimeric flaps, underwent tissue volume analysis. The average total volume of soft tissue supplied by the gracilis flap was found to be 70.21 cm3 (standard deviation [SD] = 26.99). The average volume of the PAP flap was 31.73 cm3 (SD = 26.12). The average total volume captured by the chimeric gracilis and PAP flap was 101.94 cm3 (SD = 62.40).

Conclusion The potential soft tissue volume that can be harvested from a chimeric gracilis and PAP flap is significantly greater than solitary gracilis or PAP flaps. This chimeric flap may serve as a viable and advantageous reconstructive option for patients requiring large volume soft tissue coverage, particularly if other sizable options are not available.

Keywords

reconstruction - lower extremity - gracilis - profunda artery perforator - microsurgery


Publication History

Received: 07 January 2024

Accepted: 15 April 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
06 May 2024

Article published online:
31 May 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Hammond JB, Flug JA, Foley BM. et al. A newly described, highly prevalent arterial pedicle perfuses both gracilis and profunda artery perforator flap tissues: an angiographic study of the medial thigh. J Reconstr Microsurg 2020; 36 (03) 177-181
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hammond JB, Teven CM, Flug JA. et al. The chimeric gracilis and profunda artery perforator flap: characterizing this novel flap configuration with angiography and a cadaveric model. J Reconstr Microsurg 2021; 37 (07) 617-621
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Heredero S, Falguera-Uceda MI, Sanjuan-Sanjuan A, Dean A, Solivera J. Chimeric profunda artery perforator - gracilis flap: a computed tomographic angiography study and case report. Microsurgery 2021; 41 (03) 25025-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Yao CMK, Jozaghi Y, Danker S. et al. The combined profunda artery perforator-gracilis flap for immediate facial reanimation and resurfacing of the radical parotidectomy defect. Microsurgery 2023; 43 (04) 309-315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ciudad P, Dower R, Nicoli F. et al. Pelvic-perineal reconstruction with the combined transverse upper gracilis and profunda artery perforator (TUG-PAP) flap. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2016; 69 (04) 573-575
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sharp O, Kapur S, Shaikh I, Rosich-Medina A, Haywood R. The combined use of pedicled profunda artery perforator and bilateral gracilis flaps for pelvic reconstruction: a cohort study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2021; 74 (10) 2654-2663
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kosutic D, Tsapralis N, Gubbala P, Smith M. Reconstruction of critically-sized perineal defect with perforator flap puzzle technique: a case report. Case Reports Plast Surg Hand Surg 2019; 6 (01) 38-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Murphy DC, Figus A, Stocco C, Razzano S. A comparison of patient reported outcome measures in patients who received both DIEP flap and PAP flap breast reconstructions. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2019; 72 (04) 685-710
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9. Jo T, Jeon DN, Han HH. The PAP flap breast reconstruction: a practical option for slim patients. J Reconstr Microsurg 2022; 38 (01) 27-33
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Haddock NT, Cho MJ, Gassman A, Teotia SS. Stacked profunda artery perforator flap for breast reconstruction in failed or unavailable deep inferior epigastric perforator flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 143 (03) 488e-494e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ciudad P, Maruccia M, Orfaniotis G. et al. The combined transverse upper gracilis and profunda artery perforator (TUGPAP) flap for breast reconstruction. Microsurgery 2016; 36 (05) 359-366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ciudad P, Huang TC, Manrique OJ. et al. Expanding the applications of the combined transverse upper gracilis and profunda artery perforator (TUGPAP) flap for extensive defects. Microsurgery 2019; 39 (04) 316-325
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Bodin F, Dissaux C, Dupret-Bories A, Schohn T, Fiquet C, Bruant-Rodier C. The transverse musculo-cutaneous gracilis flap for breast reconstruction: how to avoid complications. Microsurgery 2016; 36 (01) 42-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14. Karir A, Stein MJ, Zhang J. The conjoined TUGPAP flap for breast reconstruction: systematic review and illustrative anatomy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2021; 9 (04) e3512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Childers CP, Maggard-Gibbons M. Understanding costs of care in the operating room. JAMA Surg 2018; 153 (04) e176233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Abdulwadood I, Pflibsen LR, Jarvis NR. et al. The PUG flap: conjoined profunda artery perforator and upper gracilis flap for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2024; 12 (03) e5544
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Wong CH, Wei FC. Microsurgical free flap in head and neck reconstruction. Head Neck 2010; 32 (09) 1236-1245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Wong CH, Wei FC. Anterolateral thigh flap. Head Neck 2010; 32 (04) 529-540
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Shaw RJ, Batstone MD, Blackburn TK, Brown JS. The anterolateral thigh flap in head and neck reconstruction: “pearls and pitfalls”. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 48 (01) 5-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ellabban MA, Elsayed MA, Zein AB. et al. Virtual planning of the anterolateral thigh free flap for heel reconstruction. Microsurgery 2022; 42 (05) 460-469
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Cerón MA, Duque JL, Verdoy SB. et al. Characterization of the volume and thickness of DIEP flap by CTA image processing. Paper presented at: XXIII Symposium on Image, Signal Processing and Artificial Vision. “XXIII Symposium on Image, Signal Processing and Artificial Vision.” 2021: 1-6 . ISBN 978-1-6654-1668-9/21. DOI: 10.1109/STSIVA53688.2021.9592004
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nanidis TG, Ridha H, Jallali N. The use of computed tomography for the estimation of DIEP flap weights in breast reconstruction: a simple mathematical formula. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2014; 67 (10) 1352-1356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar