Reevaluation of Recipient Vessel Selection in Breast Free Flap Reconstruction.

Autor: Lemdani MS; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA., Crystal DT; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA., Ewing JN; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA., Gala Z; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA., Amro C; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA., Azoury SC; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA., Broach RB; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA., Rhemtulla IA; Department of Surgery, Christiana Care, Newark, Delaware, USA., Serletti JM; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Microsurgery [Microsurgery] 2024 Oct; Vol. 44 (7), pp. e31222.
DOI: 10.1002/micr.31222
Abstrakt: Background: Current consensus has established the internal mammary vessels (IMV) over the thoracodorsal vessels (TDV) as the preferred recipients for microvascular breast reconstruction due to their superior flow rates and long-established outcomes. Yet, there are occurrences where the IMVs are not reliable and may subsequently prompt intraoperative decision-making. Several options exist, including the contralateral IMVs, thoracoacromial vessels, and TDVs. The appropriate sequence for vessel choice is not universally agreed upon. This study reevaluates the TDVs to highlight their viability as a second-line intraoperative alternative to the IMV and provide reference to the straightforward dissection required for harvest.
Methods: A retrospective, single-institution, breast-level analysis examining 4754 breast free flaps from 2978 patients undergoing bilateral free flap reconstruction was conducted. Postoperative complications within 180 days were evaluated, and cohorts based on anatomic anastomosis (IMV vs. TDV) were created to compare outcomes. Subanalysis was conducted based on flap laterality as well as whether a flap was planned or converted intraoperatively.
Results: Of 4754 breast free flaps, 4269 (89.8%) used the IMV while 485 (10.2%) used the TDV. Most complication rates between the TVD and IMV were not significantly different. Rates of flap loss were 1.0% and 1.2% for the IMV and TDV anastomosis (p = 0.59). IMV and TDV anastomosed flaps experienced similar rates of fat necrosis (6.3% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.915). However, multivariable analysis of all breasts regardless of laterality showed that skin necrosis was significantly less likely in TDV breasts (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29-0.71, p < 0.001).
Conclusions: Given the relative similarity in cohort outcomes, TDV anastomosis can be considered a viable alternative to the IMV when the IMV is unavailable or technically disadvantageous. The TDV artery remains a robust and reliable option in the present-day plastic surgeon's repertoire for breast reconstruction.
(© 2024 The Author(s). Microsurgery published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: