Perforator Characteristics and Impact on Postoperative Outcomes in DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author:

Aravind Pathik1,Colakoglu Salih2ORCID,Bhoopalam Myan2,Ibrahim Ahmed3,Mathes David4,Kaoutzanis Christodoulos4,Mureau Marc5ORCID,Reddy Sashank2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut

2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland

3. Private Practice at Clevens Face and Body Specialists, Melbourne, Florida

4. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Colorado – CU Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado

5. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Abstract

Abstract Background High-quality evidence on perforator selection in deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap harvesting is lacking, making preoperative planning and choice of perforators “surgeon-specific.” This lack of consensus is a subject of continuous debate among microsurgeons. We aimed to systematically review perforator characteristics and their impact on DIEP flap breast reconstruction outcomes. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis across six databases: ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, Medline, Ovid Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science for all studies on DIEP flap breast reconstruction focused on perforator characteristics—caliber, number, and location. The primary goal was to analyze the impact of perforator characteristics on partial and/or total flap failure and fat necrosis. Data was analyzed using RevMan V5.3. Results Initial search gave us 2,768 articles of which 17 were included in our review. Pooled analysis did not show any statistically significant correlations between partial and/or total flap failure and perforator number, or perforator location. Sensitivity analysis accounting for heterogeneity across studies showed that, the risk for fat necrosis was significantly higher if single perforators (relative risk [RR] = 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5–2.6, I 2 = 39%) and medial row perforators (RR = 2.7, 95% CI = 1.8–3.9, I 2 = 0%) were used. Conclusion Our findings suggest that a single dominant perforator and medial row perforators may be associated with higher risk of fat necrosis after DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Adopting a standardized perforator selection algorithm may facilitate operative decision making, shorten the learning curve for novice surgeons, and optimize postoperative outcomes by minimizing the burden of major complications. This in turn would help improve patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Surgery

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3