Perforator Phase Contrast Angiography of Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforators: A Better Preoperative Imaging Tool for Flap Surgery than Computed Tomographic Angiography?

Objective The aim of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of in vivo perforator visualization by a newly proposed magnetic resonance–based perforator phase contrast angiography (pPCA) technique for deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap surgery and to prospectively compare its image quality and clinical value with computed tomographic angiography (CTA), the state-of-the-art perforator imaging technique. Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained. DIEP pPCA and CTA data were acquired in 10 female patients before DIEP flap surgery. Image findings were compared between the two techniques and with literature reports. Results The overall image quality is negatively correlated with patient BMI for CTA, but positively correlated with BMI for pPCA. Compared with CTA, pPCA has significantly better image quality (P = 0.005), signal-to-noise ratio (P < 0.001), and contrast-to-noise ratio (perforator-to-muscle, P < 0.001; perforator-to-fat, P = 0.014). It also has preferable clinical value ratings, although not statistically significant (P = 0.388). There is a good agreement (84%) between perforators detected by pPCA and CTA. Perforator location deviations between pPCA and CTA are compatible with the precision required for plastic surgery. Perforator size measured by pPCA seems to be more accurate than CTA, as it is 0.8 ± 0.3 mm smaller (P < 0.001), consistent with the reported 0.5 to 1.2 mm overestimation by CTA. There is no significant difference in perforator intramuscular course assessment (P = 0.415). Conclusions The developed magnetic resonance–based pPCA technique presents superior image quality, better vessel contrast, and more accurate perforator anatomy than the x-ray–based CTA. pPCA has the potential to emerge as the preferred preoperative planning tool for perforator flap reconstructive surgery.

[1]  Nicole Seiberlich,et al.  Sparse Reconstruction Techniques in Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Methods, Applications, and Challenges to Clinical Adoption , 2016, Investigative radiology.

[2]  W. Novicoff,et al.  The Average Size and Position of the Umbilicus in Young Men and Women , 2016, Annals of Plastic Surgery.

[3]  Jessica M. Langer,et al.  Safe Use of Contrast Media: What the Radiologist Needs to Know. , 2015, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[4]  Michael P. Chae,et al.  Comparative analysis of fluorescent angiography, computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography for planning autologous breast reconstruction. , 2015, Gland surgery.

[5]  Michael Markl,et al.  Quantification of hepatic blood flow using a high-resolution phase-contrast MRI sequence with compressed sensing acceleration. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  Johannes T. Heverhagen,et al.  Intravenous Iodinated Contrast Agents Amplify DNA Radiation Damage at CT. , 2015, Radiology.

[7]  T. Teunis,et al.  CT‐angiography prior to diep flap breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis , 2013, Microsurgery.

[8]  L. Bonomo,et al.  Planning deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps for breast reconstruction: a comparison between multidetector computed tomography and magnetic resonance angiography , 2013, European Radiology.

[9]  I. Whitaker,et al.  Preoperative Imaging for Perforator Flaps in Reconstructive Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Evidence for Current Techniques , 2012, Annals of plastic surgery.

[10]  B. Kastler,et al.  Preoperative imaging for deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps: a comparative study of computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography , 2012, European Journal of Plastic Surgery.

[11]  Aiping Ding,et al.  Extension of RPI-adult male and female computational phantoms to obese patients and a Monte Carlo study of the effect on CT imaging dose , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Nele Friedrich,et al.  Noninvasive Quantification of Hepatic Fat Content Using Three-Echo Dixon Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Correction for T2* Relaxation Effects , 2011, Investigative radiology.

[13]  Shao-Cheng Liu,et al.  Comparison of surgical result of anterolateral thigh flap in reconstruction of through-and-through cheek defect with/without CT angiography guidance. , 2011, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[14]  C. Kuhl,et al.  Dual-source parallel radiofrequency excitation body MR imaging compared with standard MR imaging at 3.0 T: initial clinical experience. , 2010, Radiology.

[15]  L. Bonomo,et al.  Planning breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforating vessels: multidetector CT angiography versus color Doppler US. , 2010, Radiology.

[16]  M. Prince,et al.  Perforator flap magnetic resonance angiography for reconstructive breast surgery: A review of 25 deep inferior epigastric and gluteal perforator artery flap patients , 2010, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[17]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  M. Schaverien,et al.  Magnetic resonance angiography in preoperative planning of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps. , 2009, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[19]  Clark J Zeebregts,et al.  Preoperative CT angiography reduces surgery time in perforator flap reconstruction. , 2009, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[20]  Rod J. Rohrich,et al.  Perforator Flaps: History, Controversies, Physiology, Anatomy, and Use in Reconstruction , 2009, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[21]  D. Stella,et al.  Abdominal wall CT angiography: a detailed account of a newly established preoperative imaging technique. , 2008, Radiology.

[22]  H. Thomsen,et al.  High Prevalence of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis in Chronic Renal Failure Patients Exposed to Gadodiamide, a Gadolinium-Containing Magnetic Resonance Contrast Agent , 2008, Investigative radiology.

[23]  D. Stella,et al.  Does the preoperative imaging of perforators with CT angiography improve operative outcomes in breast reconstruction? , 2008, Microsurgery.

[24]  A. Djamali,et al.  Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: risk factors and incidence estimation. , 2007, Radiology.

[25]  V. Runge,et al.  Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis: A Review of 6 Cases Temporally Related to Gadodiamide Injection (Omniscan) , 2007, Investigative radiology.

[26]  P. Yu,et al.  Efficacy of the Handheld Doppler in Preoperative Identification of the Cutaneous Perforators in the Anterolateral Thigh Flap , 2006, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[27]  Wiro J Niessen,et al.  Imaging of small high-density structures in CT A phantom study. , 2006, Academic radiology.

[28]  R E Giunta,et al.  The Value of Preoperative Doppler Sonography for Planning Free Perforator Flaps , 2000, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[29]  P. R. Moran.  A flow velocity zeugmatographic interlace for NMR imaging in humans. , 1982, Magnetic resonance imaging.