PDF herunterladen
J Reconstr Microsurg 2014; 30(02): 121-126
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1357272
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

The Evolution of Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: Twenty Years after the First DIEP Flap

Claragh Healy
1   St. Andrew's Centre for Burns and Plastics, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, United Kingdom
,
Robert J. Allen Sr.
2   Department of Plastic Surgery, New York University Langone Medical Centre, New York and Louisiana Health Sciences Centre, Louisiana
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

14. Juni 2013

12. August 2013

Publikationsdatum:
25. Oktober 2013 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

It is over 20 years since the inaugural deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. We review the type of flap utilized and indications in 2,850 microvascular breast reconstruction over the subsequent 20 years in the senior author's practice (Robert J. Allen). Data were extracted from a personal logbook of all microsurgical free flap breast reconstructions performed between August 1992 and August 2012. Indication for surgery; mastectomy pattern in primary reconstruction; flap type, whether unilateral or bilateral; recipient vessels; and adjunctive procedures were recorded. The DIEP was the most commonly performed flap (66%), followed by the superior gluteal artery perforator flap (12%), superficial inferior epigastric artery perforator flap (9%), inferior gluteal artery perforator flap (6%), profunda artery perforator flap (3%), and transverse upper gracilis flap (3%). Primary reconstruction accounted for 1,430 flaps (50%), secondary 992 (35%), and tertiary 425 (15%). As simultaneous bilateral reconstructions, 59% flaps were performed. With each flap, there typically ensues a period of enthusiasm which translated into surge in flap numbers. However, each flap has its own nuances and characteristics that influence patient and physician choice. Of note, each newly introduced flap, either buttock or thigh, results in a sharp decline in its predecessor. In this practice, the DIEP flap has remained the first choice in autologous breast reconstruction.

Keywords

breast reconstruction - microsurgery - flap
 

  • References

  • 1 Allen RJ, Treece P. Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 32 (1) 32-38
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Allen RJ, Tucker Jr C. Superior gluteal artery perforator free flap for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 95 (7) 1207-1212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Allen RJ, Levine JL, Granzow JW. The in-the-crease inferior gluteal artery perforator flap for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 118 (2) 333-339
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Allen RJ, Haddock NT, Ahn CY, Sadeghi A. Breast reconstruction with the profunda artery perforator flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 129 (1) 16e-23e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gill PS, Hunt JP, Guerra AB , et al. A 10-year retrospective review of 758 DIEP flaps for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 113 (4) 1153-1160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Spiegel AJ, Khan FN. An Intraoperative algorithm for use of the SIEA flap for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 120 (6) 1450-1459
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Rozen WM, Chubb D, Grinsell D, Ashton MW. The variability of the Superficial Inferior Epigastric Artery (SIEA) and its angiosome: A clinical anatomical study. Microsurgery 2010; 30 (5) 386-391
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Tuinder S, Chen CM, Massey MF, Allen Sr RJ, Van der Huist R. Introducing the septocutaneous gluteal artery perforator flap: a simplified approach to microsurgical breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127 (2) 489-495
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Schneider LF, Vasile JV, Levine JL, Allen RJ. Deep femoral artery perforator flap: a new perforator flap for breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 2011; 27 (9) 531-536
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Wilkins EG, Alderman AK. Breast reconstruction practices in north America: current trends and future priorities. Semin Plast Surg 2004; 18 (2) 149-155
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Friedman TL. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, 1st ed. New York: Farrar Straus and Giroux; 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Allen Jr RJ, LoTempio MM, Craigie JE, Allen Sr RJ. Transplantation in identical twins: another option for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 122 (4) 1019-1023
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Levine SM, Lester ME, Fontenot B, Allen Sr RJ. Perforator flap breast reconstruction after unsatisfactory implant reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2011; 66 (5) 513-517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Brewster AM, Parker PA. Current knowledge on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among women with sporadic breast cancer. Oncologist 2011; 16 (7) 935-941
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Güth U, Myrick ME, Viehl CT, Weber WP, Lardi AM, Schmid SM. Increasing rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy - a trend made in USA?. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012; 38 (4) 296-301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Stolier AJ, Wang J. Terminal duct lobular units are scarce in the nipple: implications for prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy: terminal duct lobular units in the nipple. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15 (2) 438-442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar