Diametric Comparison between the Thoracodorsal Vessel and Deep Inferior Epigastric Vessel in Breast Reconstruction

Background In microvascular anastomosis, size discrepancy is common and can increase thrombotic complications. If size differences can be predicted, then vessels of the appropriate size can be selected. This study documented the difference in diameter between the thoracodorsal (TD) vessel and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) pedicle in each patient who underwent breast reconstruction using free tissue transfer. Patients and Methods. This retrospective study included 32 anastomoses (27 breasts including five cases of supercharged anastomosis) of breast reconstruction with the free DIEP flap and TD recipient between August 2018 and June 2019. In the microscopic view, the caliber of the TD vessel, the largest branch to the serratus anterior muscle, the descending branch, the largest and the second largest branches to the latissimus dorsi muscle, and the DIEP pedicle were measured. Results The diameter of the deep inferior epigastric artery was similar to that of the descending branch, and their anastomosing rate was 56.3%. The diameter of the deep inferior epigastric vein was similar to the branch to the serratus anterior muscle and the descending branch, and their anastomosing rates were 29.3% and 29.3%, respectively. All flaps were survived; however, in one case, a reoperation was needed to remove the hematoma, in which case fat necrosis occurred as the only complication. Conclusion TD branches of similar size to the DIEP pedicle were prioritized in anastomosis. The descending branch and the branch to the serratus anterior muscle are expected to be good candidates as recipients in breast reconstruction with DIEP free flap. Moreover, supercharged anastomosis of DIEP pedicles can be achieved within TD branches.

[1]  M. Cheng,et al.  Nipple‐sparing mastectomy and breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap using thoracodorsal recipient vessels and a low lateral incision , 2018, Journal of surgical oncology.

[2]  Joseph P. Corkum,et al.  Comparing the thoracodorsal and internal mammary vessels as recipients for microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis , 2017, Microsurgery.

[3]  R. Kianmanesh,et al.  Determining the best recipient vessel site for autologous microsurgical breast reconstruction with DIEP flaps: An anatomical study. , 2017, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[4]  J. Rhie,et al.  Comparison of dissection with harmonic scalpel and conventional bipolar electrocautery in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap surgery: A consecutive cohort study. , 2017, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[5]  K. Lee,et al.  Benefits of superdrainage using SIEV in DIEP flap breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis , 2017, Microsurgery.

[6]  W. Xu,et al.  Effects of Venous Superdrainage and Arterial Supercharging on Dorsal Perforator Flap in a Rat Model , 2016, PloS one.

[7]  A. O'Neill,et al.  Usability of the internal mammary recipient vessels in microvascular breast reconstruction. , 2016, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[8]  Pierfrancesco Pugliese,et al.  Predictive and Protective Factors for Partial Necrosis in DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction: Does Nulliparity Bias Flap Viability? , 2015, Annals of plastic surgery.

[9]  Seung-Ha Park,et al.  A Clinical Anatomic Study of Internal Mammary Perforators as Recipient Vessels for Breast Reconstruction , 2013, Archives of plastic surgery.

[10]  S. Thirkannad,et al.  Size discrepancy in vessels during microvascular anastomosis: two techniques to overcome this problem. , 2012, Hand Surgery.

[11]  V. Ramakrishnan,et al.  The thoracodorsal artery and vein as recipient vessels for microsurgical breast reconstruction. , 2012, Annals of plastic surgery.

[12]  Nicolas A Guay The thoracodorsal vessels are advantageous, reliable, and safe recipient vessels for free abdominal flap breast reconstruction. , 2012, Annals of plastic surgery.

[13]  Y. Sowa,et al.  Double arterialized free jejunal flap. , 2010, Journal of reconstructive microsurgery.

[14]  Burak Ersoy,et al.  Aberrant perfusion of the serratus anterior muscle flap: report of two cases and a review of the literature. , 2010, Journal of reconstructive microsurgery.

[15]  P. Yadav,et al.  Managing venous discrepancy: simple method. , 2009, Journal of reconstructive microsurgery.

[16]  C. Meyer,et al.  Computational modeling of microarterial anastomoses with size discrepancy (small-to-large). , 2009, The Journal of surgical research.

[17]  S. Miyamoto,et al.  Effect of Recipient Arterial Blood Inflow on Free Flap Survival Area , 2008, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

[18]  S. Sebastin,et al.  Salvage of an ischaemic 'kite flap' by an arterial supercharge: a case report. , 2007, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[19]  T. Aköz,et al.  “Open y” technique in vessel diameter discrepancy , 2006, Microsurgery.

[20]  D. Rice,et al.  Efficacy of Venous Supercharging of the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap in a Rat Model , 2005, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[21]  F. Govsa,et al.  Distal variations of the neurovascular pedicle of the serratus anterior muscle as a flap , 2005, Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy.

[22]  M. Nahabedian The Internal Mammary Artery and Vein as Recipient Vessels for Microvascular Breast Reconstruction:: Are We Burning a Future Bridge? , 2004, Annals of plastic surgery.

[23]  Hak Chang,et al.  Comparison of Three Different Supercharging Procedures in a Rat Skin Flap Model , 2004, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[24]  D. Pogorelec,et al.  Breast reconstruction by the free transverse gracilis (TUG) flap. , 2004, British journal of plastic surgery.

[25]  T. Aköz,et al.  [The management of size discrepancies in microvascular anastomoses]. , 2003, Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica.

[26]  J. Lipa,et al.  Lateral Thoracic Artery as a Vascular Variant in the Supply to the Free Serratus Anterior Flap , 2001, Journal of reconstructive microsurgery.

[27]  A. Keller The Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Free Flap for Breast Reconstruction , 2001, Annals of plastic surgery.

[28]  P. Blondeel,et al.  Venous Congestion and Blood Flow in Free Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous and Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flaps , 2000, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[29]  J. de la Peña‐Salcedo,et al.  Experimental microvascular sleeve anastomosis in size discrepancy vessels , 2000, Microsurgery.

[30]  J. de la Peña‐Salcedo,et al.  Techniques for management of size discrepancies in microvascular anastomosis , 2000, Microsurgery.

[31]  J. Harris,et al.  Effect of diameter of microvascular interposition vein grafts on vessel patency and free flap survival in the rat model. , 1999, The Journal of otolaryngology.

[32]  E. Weiler-mithoff,et al.  Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap in breast reconstruction: experience with the first 50 flaps. , 1999, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[33]  S. S. Kroll Why autologous tissue , 1998 .

[34]  Rod J. Rohrich,et al.  An Anatomic Study of the Internal Mammary Veins: Clinical Implications for Free‐Tissue‐Transfer Breast Reconstruction , 1997, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[35]  C. Driscoll,et al.  The anatomy of the lower serratus anterior muscle: a fresh cadaver study. , 1995, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[36]  K. Ueda,et al.  Which Vessel is More Important in the Supercharged Flap- Artery Vein, or Both? An Experimental Study , 1994, Journal of reconstructive microsurgery.

[37]  S. Jeng,et al.  Experience of 73 free groin flaps. , 1992, British journal of plastic surgery.

[38]  J. Monsivais Microvascular grafts: Effect of diameter discrepancy on patency rates , 1990, Microsurgery.

[39]  S. Soeda,et al.  The importance of arterial inflow in the distal side of a flap: an experimental investigation. , 1982, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.