SIEA versus DIEP Arterial Complications: A Cohort Study

The authors analyzed arterial complications in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps compared with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps. The variability, caliber, and angiosome of the SIEA are cited as limitations. Exper...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963) 2015-05, Vol.135 (5), p.802e-807e
Hauptverfasser: Coroneos, Christopher J., Heller, Adrian M., Voineskos, Sophocles H., Avram, Ronen
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 807e
container_issue 5
container_start_page 802e
container_title Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)
container_volume 135
creator Coroneos, Christopher J.
Heller, Adrian M.
Voineskos, Sophocles H.
Avram, Ronen
description The authors analyzed arterial complications in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps compared with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps. The variability, caliber, and angiosome of the SIEA are cited as limitations. Experts currently limit SIEA reconstruction to cases with favorable arterial anatomy on preoperative imaging. In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive flaps for breast reconstruction from the initial 7 years of a single microsurgeon's practice (2007 to 2013) were reviewed. Preoperative imaging was not used. Consistent intraoperative criteria for SIEA flap selection were used. All complications were abstracted independently in duplicate using a standardized form and a priori criteria. One hundred sixty-nine free flaps (SIEA, n = 44; DIEP, n = 125) were performed on 112 patients for unilateral or bilateral breast reconstruction. Significantly more SIEA flaps required reexploration versus DIEP flaps (20 percent versus 7 percent; p = 0.03). Arterial insufficiency was significantly higher among SIEA flaps (14 percent versus 1 percent; p = 0.001). There was no difference in venous insufficiency (p = 0.92). Significantly more SIEA flaps had necrosis requiring intervention (p = 0.03). Ultimately, significantly more SIEA flaps failed completely (14 percent versus 2 percent; p < 0.01). All SIEA flap failures were attributable to arterial thrombosis. Compared with DIEP flaps, SIEA flaps had significantly higher proportions of reexploration, arterial complication, necrosis, and failure. No difference in venous complications was found. DIEP outcomes agree with existing literature from specialized centers. Complications and failures in SIEA flaps were attributed to arterial thrombosis. Given the authors' practice setting, SIEA flaps are no longer performed. Therapeutic, III.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001150
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1677374675</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1677374675</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3013-76fba530e7e3e14dff66d59fd9f19086d8d571d9d81935f1c428d016116156363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkF9LwzAUxYMobk6_gUgffenMTZqk8a3MqYOBw-lz6JqUVVM7k9axb2_m5h-8XLjcw7nnwg-hc8BDwFJczR7nQ_ynABg-QH1gRMYJScgh6mNMSQyYkR468f4leATl7Bj1CJMgCSd9JOaTcRZ9GOc7H91MxrMoc61xVW6jUVOvbFXkbdW8-esoC8KycW00bzu9OUVHZW69OdvPAXq-HT-N7uPpw91klE3jgmKgseDlImcUG2GogUSXJeeayVLLEiROuU41E6ClTkFSVkKRkFRj4BCaccrpAF3ucleuee-Mb1Vd-cJYm7-ZpvMKuBBUJFywYE121sI13jtTqpWr6txtFGC1RaYCMvUfWTi72H_oFrXRP0ffjH5z140NaPyr7dbGqaXJbbv8yuOMJjHBIY2FLd5KlH4CD-Ry5w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1677374675</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>SIEA versus DIEP Arterial Complications: A Cohort Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Coroneos, Christopher J. ; Heller, Adrian M. ; Voineskos, Sophocles H. ; Avram, Ronen</creator><creatorcontrib>Coroneos, Christopher J. ; Heller, Adrian M. ; Voineskos, Sophocles H. ; Avram, Ronen</creatorcontrib><description>The authors analyzed arterial complications in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps compared with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps. The variability, caliber, and angiosome of the SIEA are cited as limitations. Experts currently limit SIEA reconstruction to cases with favorable arterial anatomy on preoperative imaging. In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive flaps for breast reconstruction from the initial 7 years of a single microsurgeon's practice (2007 to 2013) were reviewed. Preoperative imaging was not used. Consistent intraoperative criteria for SIEA flap selection were used. All complications were abstracted independently in duplicate using a standardized form and a priori criteria. One hundred sixty-nine free flaps (SIEA, n = 44; DIEP, n = 125) were performed on 112 patients for unilateral or bilateral breast reconstruction. Significantly more SIEA flaps required reexploration versus DIEP flaps (20 percent versus 7 percent; p = 0.03). Arterial insufficiency was significantly higher among SIEA flaps (14 percent versus 1 percent; p = 0.001). There was no difference in venous insufficiency (p = 0.92). Significantly more SIEA flaps had necrosis requiring intervention (p = 0.03). Ultimately, significantly more SIEA flaps failed completely (14 percent versus 2 percent; p &lt; 0.01). All SIEA flap failures were attributable to arterial thrombosis. Compared with DIEP flaps, SIEA flaps had significantly higher proportions of reexploration, arterial complication, necrosis, and failure. No difference in venous complications was found. DIEP outcomes agree with existing literature from specialized centers. Complications and failures in SIEA flaps were attributed to arterial thrombosis. Given the authors' practice setting, SIEA flaps are no longer performed. Therapeutic, III.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0032-1052</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1529-4242</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001150</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25919262</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Society of Plastic Surgeons</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Epigastric Arteries - surgery ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Free Tissue Flaps - blood supply ; Humans ; Mammaplasty - methods ; Middle Aged ; Retrospective Studies ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963), 2015-05, Vol.135 (5), p.802e-807e</ispartof><rights>American Society of Plastic Surgeons</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3013-76fba530e7e3e14dff66d59fd9f19086d8d571d9d81935f1c428d016116156363</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25919262$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Coroneos, Christopher J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heller, Adrian M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Voineskos, Sophocles H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avram, Ronen</creatorcontrib><title>SIEA versus DIEP Arterial Complications: A Cohort Study</title><title>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)</title><addtitle>Plast Reconstr Surg</addtitle><description>The authors analyzed arterial complications in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps compared with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps. The variability, caliber, and angiosome of the SIEA are cited as limitations. Experts currently limit SIEA reconstruction to cases with favorable arterial anatomy on preoperative imaging. In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive flaps for breast reconstruction from the initial 7 years of a single microsurgeon's practice (2007 to 2013) were reviewed. Preoperative imaging was not used. Consistent intraoperative criteria for SIEA flap selection were used. All complications were abstracted independently in duplicate using a standardized form and a priori criteria. One hundred sixty-nine free flaps (SIEA, n = 44; DIEP, n = 125) were performed on 112 patients for unilateral or bilateral breast reconstruction. Significantly more SIEA flaps required reexploration versus DIEP flaps (20 percent versus 7 percent; p = 0.03). Arterial insufficiency was significantly higher among SIEA flaps (14 percent versus 1 percent; p = 0.001). There was no difference in venous insufficiency (p = 0.92). Significantly more SIEA flaps had necrosis requiring intervention (p = 0.03). Ultimately, significantly more SIEA flaps failed completely (14 percent versus 2 percent; p &lt; 0.01). All SIEA flap failures were attributable to arterial thrombosis. Compared with DIEP flaps, SIEA flaps had significantly higher proportions of reexploration, arterial complication, necrosis, and failure. No difference in venous complications was found. DIEP outcomes agree with existing literature from specialized centers. Complications and failures in SIEA flaps were attributed to arterial thrombosis. Given the authors' practice setting, SIEA flaps are no longer performed. Therapeutic, III.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Epigastric Arteries - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Free Tissue Flaps - blood supply</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mammaplasty - methods</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0032-1052</issn><issn>1529-4242</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkF9LwzAUxYMobk6_gUgffenMTZqk8a3MqYOBw-lz6JqUVVM7k9axb2_m5h-8XLjcw7nnwg-hc8BDwFJczR7nQ_ynABg-QH1gRMYJScgh6mNMSQyYkR468f4leATl7Bj1CJMgCSd9JOaTcRZ9GOc7H91MxrMoc61xVW6jUVOvbFXkbdW8-esoC8KycW00bzu9OUVHZW69OdvPAXq-HT-N7uPpw91klE3jgmKgseDlImcUG2GogUSXJeeayVLLEiROuU41E6ClTkFSVkKRkFRj4BCaccrpAF3ucleuee-Mb1Vd-cJYm7-ZpvMKuBBUJFywYE121sI13jtTqpWr6txtFGC1RaYCMvUfWTi72H_oFrXRP0ffjH5z140NaPyr7dbGqaXJbbv8yuOMJjHBIY2FLd5KlH4CD-Ry5w</recordid><startdate>20150501</startdate><enddate>20150501</enddate><creator>Coroneos, Christopher J.</creator><creator>Heller, Adrian M.</creator><creator>Voineskos, Sophocles H.</creator><creator>Avram, Ronen</creator><general>American Society of Plastic Surgeons</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150501</creationdate><title>SIEA versus DIEP Arterial Complications: A Cohort Study</title><author>Coroneos, Christopher J. ; Heller, Adrian M. ; Voineskos, Sophocles H. ; Avram, Ronen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3013-76fba530e7e3e14dff66d59fd9f19086d8d571d9d81935f1c428d016116156363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Epigastric Arteries - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Free Tissue Flaps - blood supply</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mammaplasty - methods</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Coroneos, Christopher J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heller, Adrian M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Voineskos, Sophocles H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avram, Ronen</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Coroneos, Christopher J.</au><au>Heller, Adrian M.</au><au>Voineskos, Sophocles H.</au><au>Avram, Ronen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>SIEA versus DIEP Arterial Complications: A Cohort Study</atitle><jtitle>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)</jtitle><addtitle>Plast Reconstr Surg</addtitle><date>2015-05-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>135</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>802e</spage><epage>807e</epage><pages>802e-807e</pages><issn>0032-1052</issn><eissn>1529-4242</eissn><abstract>The authors analyzed arterial complications in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps compared with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps. The variability, caliber, and angiosome of the SIEA are cited as limitations. Experts currently limit SIEA reconstruction to cases with favorable arterial anatomy on preoperative imaging. In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive flaps for breast reconstruction from the initial 7 years of a single microsurgeon's practice (2007 to 2013) were reviewed. Preoperative imaging was not used. Consistent intraoperative criteria for SIEA flap selection were used. All complications were abstracted independently in duplicate using a standardized form and a priori criteria. One hundred sixty-nine free flaps (SIEA, n = 44; DIEP, n = 125) were performed on 112 patients for unilateral or bilateral breast reconstruction. Significantly more SIEA flaps required reexploration versus DIEP flaps (20 percent versus 7 percent; p = 0.03). Arterial insufficiency was significantly higher among SIEA flaps (14 percent versus 1 percent; p = 0.001). There was no difference in venous insufficiency (p = 0.92). Significantly more SIEA flaps had necrosis requiring intervention (p = 0.03). Ultimately, significantly more SIEA flaps failed completely (14 percent versus 2 percent; p &lt; 0.01). All SIEA flap failures were attributable to arterial thrombosis. Compared with DIEP flaps, SIEA flaps had significantly higher proportions of reexploration, arterial complication, necrosis, and failure. No difference in venous complications was found. DIEP outcomes agree with existing literature from specialized centers. Complications and failures in SIEA flaps were attributed to arterial thrombosis. Given the authors' practice setting, SIEA flaps are no longer performed. Therapeutic, III.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Society of Plastic Surgeons</pub><pmid>25919262</pmid><doi>10.1097/PRS.0000000000001150</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0032-1052
ispartof Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963), 2015-05, Vol.135 (5), p.802e-807e
issn 0032-1052
1529-4242
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1677374675
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Adult
Aged
Epigastric Arteries - surgery
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Free Tissue Flaps - blood supply
Humans
Mammaplasty - methods
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Time Factors
title SIEA versus DIEP Arterial Complications: A Cohort Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T09%3A33%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=SIEA%20versus%20DIEP%20Arterial%20Complications:%20A%20Cohort%20Study&rft.jtitle=Plastic%20and%20reconstructive%20surgery%20(1963)&rft.au=Coroneos,%20Christopher%20J.&rft.date=2015-05-01&rft.volume=135&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=802e&rft.epage=807e&rft.pages=802e-807e&rft.issn=0032-1052&rft.eissn=1529-4242&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/PRS.0000000000001150&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1677374675%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1677374675&rft_id=info:pmid/25919262&rfr_iscdi=true