Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2022; 49(04): 494-500
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1751103
Breast/Trunk
Original Article

Comparing Seroma Formation at the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator, Transverse Musculocutaneous Gracilis, and Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator Flap Donor Sites after Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction

Alisha Merchant 
1   Faculty of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
,
Nicole E. Speck 
2   Plastic Surgery Group, Zurich, Switzerland
3   Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, Aesthetic and Hand Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Michal Michalak 
4   Department of Computer Science and Statistics, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland
,
Dirk J. Schaefer 
3   Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, Aesthetic and Hand Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Jian Farhadi 
2   Plastic Surgery Group, Zurich, Switzerland
5   University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Seroma formation is the most common donor site complication following autologous breast reconstruction, along with hematoma. Seroma may lead to patient discomfort and may prolong hospital stay or delay adjuvant treatment. The aim of this study was to compare seroma rates between the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP), transverse musculocutaneous gracilis (TMG), and superior gluteal artery perforator (SGAP) donor sites.

Methods The authors conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study consisting of chart review of all patients who underwent microsurgical breast reconstruction from April 2018 to June 2020. The primary outcome studied was frequency of seroma formation at the different donor sites. The secondary outcome evaluated potential prognostic properties associated with seroma formation. Third, the number of donor site seroma evacuations was compared between the three donor sites.

Results Overall, 242 breast reconstructions were performed in 189 patients. Demographic data were found statistically comparable between the three flap cohorts, except for body mass index (BMI). Frequency of seroma formation was highest at the SGAP donor site (75.0%), followed by the TMG (65.0%), and DIEP (28.6%) donor sites. No association was found between seroma formation and BMI, age at surgery, smoking status, diabetes mellitus, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or DIEP laterality. The mean number of seroma evacuations was significantly higher in the SGAP and the TMG group compared with the DIEP group.

Conclusion This study provides a single center's experience regarding seroma formation at the donor site after microsurgical breast reconstruction. The observed rate of donor site seroma formation was comparably high, especially in the TMG and SGAP group, necessitating an adaption of the surgical protocol.

Keywords

seroma - mammaplasty - surgical flaps - microsurgery

Author Contributions

A.M. performed data collection, statistical analysis, and drafted and revised the manuscript. N.E.S. assisted in designing the project and wrote all drafts and revisions. M.M. performed statistical analysis and assisted to revise the manuscript. D.J.S. assisted to revise the manuscript. J.F. designed the project of this article and assisted to write all drafts and revisions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.


Ethical Approval

All procedures performed within this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee, as well as with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. Given that this study was conducted in the context of an audit as part of a quality improvement assessment, no specific approval was needed, as confirmed by the local medical ethics committee (BASEC-Nr. 2020–00609).


Patient Consent

The patients provided written consent in accordance with institutional policies.




Publication History

Article published online:
30 July 2022

© 2022. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Jeevan R, Cromwell DA, Browne JP. et al. Findings of a national comparative audit of mastectomy and breast reconstruction surgery in England. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2014; 67 (10) 1333-1344
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Chow WTH, Oni G, Ramakrishnan VV, Griffiths M. The use of plasmakinetic cautery compared to conventional electrocautery for dissection of abdominal free flap for breast reconstruction: single-centre, randomized controlled study. Gland Surg 2019; 8 (03) 242-248
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Andrades P, Prado A. Composition of postabdominoplasty seroma. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2007; 31 (05) 514-518
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Bae SH, Lee YW, Nam SB. et al. Recurrent late seroma after immediate breast reconstruction with latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap. Arch Plast Surg 2020; 47 (03) 267-271
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Nedomansky J, Nickl S, Radtke C, Haslik W, Schroegendorfer KF. Venous superdrainage in DIEP flap breast reconstruction: the impact of superficial inferior epigastric vein dissection on abdominal seroma formation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 141 (02) 206e-212e
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Zoccali G, Molina A, Farhadi J. Is long-term post-operative monitoring of microsurgical flaps still necessary?. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2017; 70 (08) 996-1000
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Lindenblatt N, Gruenherz L, Farhadi J. A systematic review of donor site aesthetic and complications after deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction. Gland Surg 2019; 8 (04) 389-398
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Xu H, Dong J, Wang T. Bipedicle deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for unilateral breast reconstruction: seven years' experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124 (06) 1797-1807
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Lakhiani C, DeFazio MV, Han K, Falola R, Evans K. Donor-site morbidity following free tissue harvest from the thigh: a systematic review and pooled analysis of complications. J Reconstr Microsurg 2016; 32 (05) 342-357
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Blondeel PN. The sensate free superior gluteal artery perforator (S-GAP) flap: a valuable alternative in autologous breast reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 1999; 52 (03) 185-193
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Guerra AB, Metzinger SE, Bidros RS, Gill PS, Dupin CL, Allen RJ. Breast reconstruction with gluteal artery perforator (GAP) flaps: a critical analysis of 142 cases. Ann Plast Surg 2004; 52 (02) 118-125
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 von Meyenfeldt M. Cancer-associated malnutrition: an introduction. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2005; 9 (Suppl. 02) S35-S38
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Gupta D, Lis CG. Pretreatment serum albumin as a predictor of cancer survival: a systematic review of the epidemiological literature. Nutr J 2010; 9: 69
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Klink CD, Binnebösel M, Lucas AH. et al. Serum analyses for protein, albumin and IL-1-RA serve as reliable predictors for seroma formation after incisional hernia repair. Hernia 2011; 15 (01) 69-73
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Modarressi A, Müller CT, Montet X, Rüegg EM, Pittet-Cuénod B. DIEP flap for breast reconstruction: is abdominal fat thickness associated with post-operative complications?. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2017; 70 (08) 1068-1075
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Seidenstuecker K, Munder B, Mahajan AL, Richrath P, Behrendt P, Andree C. Morbidity of microsurgical breast reconstruction in patients with comorbid conditions. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127 (03) 1086-1092
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Guerra AB, Metzinger SE, Bidros RS. et al. Bilateral breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap: an experience with 280 flaps. Ann Plast Surg 2004; 52 (03) 246-252
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Fischer JP, Nelson JA, Sieber B. et al. Free tissue transfer in the obese patient: an outcome and cost analysis in 1258 consecutive abdominally based reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131 (05) 681e-692e
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Sadeghi A, Malata C. CASE REPORT persistent seromas in abdominal free flap donor sites after postmastectomy breast reconstruction surgery: case reports and literature review. Eplasty 2013; 13: e24
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 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 (04) 1153-1160
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Munder B, Andree C, Witzel C. et al. The DIEP flap as well-established method of choice for autologous breast reconstruction with a low complication rate - retrospective single-centre 10-year experience. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2020; 80 (06) 628-638
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Kontos M, Petrou A, Prassas E. et al. Pressure dressing in breast surgery: is this the solution for seroma formation?. J BUON 2008; 13 (01) 65-67
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Rousseau P, Vincent H, Potier B, Arnaud D, Darsonval V. Diathermocoagulation in cutting mode and large flap dissection. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127 (05) 2093-2098
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Marsh DJ, Fox A, Grobbelaar AO, Chana JS. Abdominoplasty and seroma: a prospective randomised study comparing scalpel and handheld electrocautery dissection. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2015; 68 (02) 192-196
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Lee D, Jung BK, Roh TS, Kim YS. Ultrasonic dissection versus electrocautery for immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction. Arch Plast Surg 2020; 47 (01) 20-25
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Janis JE, Khansa L, Khansa I. Strategies for postoperative seroma prevention: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 138 (01) 240-252
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Pollock H, Pollock T. Progressive tension sutures: a technique to reduce local complications in abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105 (07) 2583-2586
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Sforza M, Husein R, Andjelkov K, Rozental-Fernandes PC, Zaccheddu R, Jovanovic M. Use of quilting sutures during abdominoplasty to prevent seroma formation: are they really effective?. Aesthet Surg J 2015; 35 (05) 574-580
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Warner JP, Gutowski KA. Abdominoplasty with progressive tension closure using a barbed suture technique. Aesthet Surg J 2009; 29 (03) 221-225
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Nagarkar P, Lakhiani C, Cheng A, Lee M, Teotia S, Saint-Cyr M. No-drain DIEP flap donor-site closure using barbed progressive tension sutures. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2016; 4 (04) e672
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Liang DG, Dusseldorp JR, van Schalkwyk C. et al. Running barbed suture quilting reduces abdominal drainage in perforator-based breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2016; 69 (01) 42-47
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 32 Salgarello M, Tambasco D, Farallo E. DIEP flap donor site versus elective abdominoplasty short-term complication rates: a meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2012; 36 (02) 363-369
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar