Sydney Somers, Brittany Foley, Aaron Dadzie, Chase Hart, Joanna Chen, Catherine H Bautista, Kaylee Scott, Devin Eddington, Jayant P Agarwal, Alvin C Kwok
{"title":"SIEA/SCIA与DIEP皮瓣用于自体乳房重建的比较。","authors":"Sydney Somers, Brittany Foley, Aaron Dadzie, Chase Hart, Joanna Chen, Catherine H Bautista, Kaylee Scott, Devin Eddington, Jayant P Agarwal, Alvin C Kwok","doi":"10.1055/a-2540-0987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is considered the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction (ABR). Less commonly used abdominal flaps include the superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) and the superficial circumflex iliac artery (SCIA) flaps which are based on the superficial vasculature of the abdominal wall. We sought to compare complication rates between DIEP and superficial system flaps and their associated risk factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A retrospective chart review of 400 breast cancer patients undergoing abdominally-based free flap breast reconstruction with either a DIEP or superficial flap from January 2017 to December 2023 was performed at a single institution. The primary outcome was breast and abdominal site complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> A total of 638 flaps, 571 (89.4%) DIEP and 67 (10.5%) superficial, were performed with flap complication rates of 27.3 and 22.4%, respectively. At the recipient site, there was a significant difference in the rate of postoperative thrombosis (0.7% vs. 4.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.015); however, there were no differences for flap failure (0.4% vs. 1.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.28) or other flap complications. Donor site outcomes were similar between groups. Although not statistically significant, abdominal bulging was seen in 18 DIEP flap patients compared with none observed in the superficial flap patients (<i>p</i> = 0.24). When controlling for age, BMI, and radiation history, the overall rate of superficial flap and abdominal complications was not statistically significant from the rate of DIEP flap complications (<i>p</i> = 0.576).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Compared with DIEP flaps, superficial flaps had significantly higher rates of immediate perioperative thrombosis. However, there were no significant differences in rates of flap failure or other flap complications with superficial flaps compared with DIEP flaps. There was a clinically significant trend toward increased abdominal bulging with the use of DIEP flaps. Our results will help surgeons better understand the risks and benefits associated with superficial flaps for ABR.</p>","PeriodicalId":16949,"journal":{"name":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of SIEA/SCIA and DIEP Flaps for Autologous Breast Reconstruction.\",\"authors\":\"Sydney Somers, Brittany Foley, Aaron Dadzie, Chase Hart, Joanna Chen, Catherine H Bautista, Kaylee Scott, Devin Eddington, Jayant P Agarwal, Alvin C Kwok\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2540-0987\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong> The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is considered the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction (ABR). Less commonly used abdominal flaps include the superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) and the superficial circumflex iliac artery (SCIA) flaps which are based on the superficial vasculature of the abdominal wall. We sought to compare complication rates between DIEP and superficial system flaps and their associated risk factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A retrospective chart review of 400 breast cancer patients undergoing abdominally-based free flap breast reconstruction with either a DIEP or superficial flap from January 2017 to December 2023 was performed at a single institution. The primary outcome was breast and abdominal site complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> A total of 638 flaps, 571 (89.4%) DIEP and 67 (10.5%) superficial, were performed with flap complication rates of 27.3 and 22.4%, respectively. At the recipient site, there was a significant difference in the rate of postoperative thrombosis (0.7% vs. 4.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.015); however, there were no differences for flap failure (0.4% vs. 1.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.28) or other flap complications. Donor site outcomes were similar between groups. Although not statistically significant, abdominal bulging was seen in 18 DIEP flap patients compared with none observed in the superficial flap patients (<i>p</i> = 0.24). When controlling for age, BMI, and radiation history, the overall rate of superficial flap and abdominal complications was not statistically significant from the rate of DIEP flap complications (<i>p</i> = 0.576).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Compared with DIEP flaps, superficial flaps had significantly higher rates of immediate perioperative thrombosis. However, there were no significant differences in rates of flap failure or other flap complications with superficial flaps compared with DIEP flaps. There was a clinically significant trend toward increased abdominal bulging with the use of DIEP flaps. Our results will help surgeons better understand the risks and benefits associated with superficial flaps for ABR.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16949,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-11\",\"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-2540-0987\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2540-0987","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
摘要
背景腹下深穿支皮瓣被认为是自体乳房再造术的金标准。不太常用的腹部皮瓣包括腹壁下浅动脉(SIEA)和旋髂浅动脉(SCIA)皮瓣,它们是基于腹壁的浅血管系统。我们试图比较DIEP和浅表系统皮瓣的并发症发生率及其相关的危险因素。方法回顾性分析2017年1月至2023年12月在同一医院行DIEP或浅表皮瓣腹侧游离皮瓣乳房再造术的400例乳腺癌患者。主要结局是乳房和腹部并发症。结果共行皮瓣638例,深层皮瓣571例(89.4%),浅表皮瓣67例(10.5%),皮瓣并发症发生率分别为27.3%和22.4%。在受体部位,术后血栓形成率有显著差异(0.7% vs. 4.5%, p=0.015);然而,在皮瓣失败(0.4% vs. 1.5%, p=0.28)或其他皮瓣并发症方面没有差异。两组间供体部位结果相似。虽然没有统计学意义,但18例DIEP皮瓣患者出现腹部隆起,而浅表皮瓣患者没有出现腹部隆起(p=0.24)。在控制年龄、BMI和放疗史的情况下,与DIEP皮瓣并发症相比,浅表皮瓣和腹部并发症的总体发生率无统计学意义(p=0.576)。结论与DIEP皮瓣相比,浅表皮瓣围手术期即刻血栓发生率明显增高。然而,与DIEP皮瓣相比,浅表皮瓣在皮瓣失败或其他皮瓣并发症发生率方面没有显着差异。使用DIEP皮瓣有明显的腹部隆起的临床趋势。我们的研究结果将帮助外科医生更好地了解浅表皮瓣自体乳房重建的风险和益处。
A Comparison of SIEA/SCIA and DIEP Flaps for Autologous Breast Reconstruction.
Background: The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is considered the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction (ABR). Less commonly used abdominal flaps include the superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) and the superficial circumflex iliac artery (SCIA) flaps which are based on the superficial vasculature of the abdominal wall. We sought to compare complication rates between DIEP and superficial system flaps and their associated risk factors.
Methods: A retrospective chart review of 400 breast cancer patients undergoing abdominally-based free flap breast reconstruction with either a DIEP or superficial flap from January 2017 to December 2023 was performed at a single institution. The primary outcome was breast and abdominal site complications.
Results: A total of 638 flaps, 571 (89.4%) DIEP and 67 (10.5%) superficial, were performed with flap complication rates of 27.3 and 22.4%, respectively. At the recipient site, there was a significant difference in the rate of postoperative thrombosis (0.7% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.015); however, there were no differences for flap failure (0.4% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.28) or other flap complications. Donor site outcomes were similar between groups. Although not statistically significant, abdominal bulging was seen in 18 DIEP flap patients compared with none observed in the superficial flap patients (p = 0.24). When controlling for age, BMI, and radiation history, the overall rate of superficial flap and abdominal complications was not statistically significant from the rate of DIEP flap complications (p = 0.576).
Conclusion: Compared with DIEP flaps, superficial flaps had significantly higher rates of immediate perioperative thrombosis. However, there were no significant differences in rates of flap failure or other flap complications with superficial flaps compared with DIEP flaps. There was a clinically significant trend toward increased abdominal bulging with the use of DIEP flaps. Our results will help surgeons better understand the risks and benefits associated with superficial flaps for ABR.
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.