Diwakar Phuyal, Isaac Mordukhovich, James Gaston, Arturo J Rios-Diaz, Osama Darras, Rommy Obeid, Risal Djohan, Graham Schwarz, Raffi Gurunian, Sarah N Bishop
{"title":"Optimizing Donor Site Morbidity in DIEP Flap Reconstruction: Advancements in Minimizing Anterior Fascial Defects: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Diwakar Phuyal, Isaac Mordukhovich, James Gaston, Arturo J Rios-Diaz, Osama Darras, Rommy Obeid, Risal Djohan, Graham Schwarz, Raffi Gurunian, Sarah N Bishop","doi":"10.1055/a-2659-6939","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Numerous minimally invasive deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (MI-DIEP) techniques have been described in the literature to reduce donor site morbidities. This systematic review aimed to summarize existing MI-DIEP techniques and postoperative outcomes relative to conventional harvest (cDIEP).A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines to include articles with novel DIEP harvesting techniques. Studies without perioperative information were excluded. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used to compare complication rates (partial flap loss, total flap loss, hernia or bulge, and fat necrosis) in MI-DIEP with cDIEP. Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was used for bias assessment.A total of 978 patients underwent 1,272 MI-DIEP flap harvests across 17 studies. Techniques included robotic DIEP (rDIEP; <i>n</i> = 97), abdominal perforator exchange (APEX; <i>n</i> = 158), laparoscopic (<i>n</i> = 39), endoscopic (<i>n</i> = 94), two-staged delayed DIEP (<i>n</i> = 135), short fasciotomy (<i>n</i> = 124), short pedicle (<i>n</i> = 26), vascular pedicle measuring (<i>n</i> = 209), and microfascial incision (<i>n</i> = 81). No significant differences were found between endoscopic, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches compared with cDIEP. However, the short pedicle technique had higher partial flap loss (8.82% vs. 1.98%, <i>p</i> = 0.04), while APEX and vascular pedicle measuring techniques had lower fat necrosis rates (1.99% and 0.48% vs. 5.81%, <i>p</i> = 0.04 and 0.004 respectively). Short fasciotomy was associated with higher fat necrosis (12.9% vs. 5.8%, <i>p</i> = 0.004) and longer hospital stay (<i>p</i> = 0.005). Robotic, laparoscopic, endoscopic, two-staged, and APEX techniques were associated with shorter hospital stays, and rDIEP was linked to reduced postoperative day 1 pain (<i>p</i> < 0.001).MI-DIEP techniques demonstrate comparable complication rates to cDIEP, with certain methods offering benefits such as reduced fat necrosis, shorter hospital stays, and less postoperative pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":16949,"journal":{"name":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2659-6939","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Numerous minimally invasive deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (MI-DIEP) techniques have been described in the literature to reduce donor site morbidities. This systematic review aimed to summarize existing MI-DIEP techniques and postoperative outcomes relative to conventional harvest (cDIEP).A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines to include articles with novel DIEP harvesting techniques. Studies without perioperative information were excluded. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used to compare complication rates (partial flap loss, total flap loss, hernia or bulge, and fat necrosis) in MI-DIEP with cDIEP. Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was used for bias assessment.A total of 978 patients underwent 1,272 MI-DIEP flap harvests across 17 studies. Techniques included robotic DIEP (rDIEP; n = 97), abdominal perforator exchange (APEX; n = 158), laparoscopic (n = 39), endoscopic (n = 94), two-staged delayed DIEP (n = 135), short fasciotomy (n = 124), short pedicle (n = 26), vascular pedicle measuring (n = 209), and microfascial incision (n = 81). No significant differences were found between endoscopic, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches compared with cDIEP. However, the short pedicle technique had higher partial flap loss (8.82% vs. 1.98%, p = 0.04), while APEX and vascular pedicle measuring techniques had lower fat necrosis rates (1.99% and 0.48% vs. 5.81%, p = 0.04 and 0.004 respectively). Short fasciotomy was associated with higher fat necrosis (12.9% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.004) and longer hospital stay (p = 0.005). Robotic, laparoscopic, endoscopic, two-staged, and APEX techniques were associated with shorter hospital stays, and rDIEP was linked to reduced postoperative day 1 pain (p < 0.001).MI-DIEP techniques demonstrate comparable complication rates to cDIEP, with certain methods offering benefits such as reduced fat necrosis, shorter hospital stays, and less postoperative pain.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery is a peer-reviewed, indexed journal that provides an international forum for the publication of articles focusing on reconstructive microsurgery and complex reconstructive surgery. The journal was originally established in 1984 for the microsurgical community to publish and share academic papers.
The Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery provides the latest in original research spanning basic laboratory, translational, and clinical investigations. Review papers cover current topics in complex reconstruction and microsurgery. In addition, special sections discuss new technologies, innovations, materials, and significant problem cases.
The journal welcomes controversial topics, editorial comments, book reviews, and letters to the Editor, in order to complete the balanced spectrum of information available in the Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery. All articles undergo stringent peer review by international experts in the specialty.