Background: The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is the commonest flap used for breast reconstruction after mastectomy. It is performed as a unilateral (based on one [unipedicled] or two [bipedicled] vascular pedicles) or bilateral procedure following unilateral or bilateral mastectomies. No previous studies have comprehensively analyzed analgesia requirements and hospital stay of these three forms of surgical reconstruction. Methods: A 7-year retrospective cohort study (2008–2015) of a single-surgeon’s DIEP-patients was conducted. Patient-reported pain scores, patient-controlled morphine requirements and recovery times were compared using non-parametric statistics and multivariable regression. Results: The study included 135 participants: unilateral unipedicled (n=84), unilateral bipedicled (n=24) and bilateral unipedicled (n=27). Univariate comparison of the three DIEP types showed a significant difference in 12-hour postoperative morphine requirements (P=0.020); bipedicled unilateral patients used significantly less morphine than unipedicled (unilateral) patients at 12 (P=0.005), 24 (P=0.020), and 48 (P=0.046) hours. Multivariable regression comparing these two groups revealed that both reconstruction type and smoking status were significant predictors for 12-hour postoperative morphine usage (P=0.038 and P=0.049, respectively), but only smoking, remained significant at 24 (P=0.010) and 48 (P=0.010) hours. Bilateral reconstruction patients’ mean hospital stay was 2 days longer than either unilateral reconstruction (P<0.001). Conclusions Although all three forms of DIEP flap breast reconstruction had similar postoperative pain measures, a novel finding of our study was that bipedicled DIEP flap harvest might be associated with lower early postoperative morphine requirements. Bilateral and bipedicled procedures in appropriate patients might therefore be undertaken without significantly increased pain/morbidity compared to unilateral unipedicled reconstructions.

Superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps represent a useful option in autologous breast reconstruction. However, the short-fixed pedicle can limit flap inset options. We present a challenging flap inset successfully addressed by de-epithelialization, turnover, and counterintuitive rotation. A 47-year-old woman underwent left tertiary breast reconstruction with stacked free flaps using right deep inferior epigastric perforator and left SIEA vessels. Antegrade and retrograde anastomoses to the internal mammary (IM) vessels were preferred; additionally, the thoracodorsal vessels were unavailable due to previous latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction. Optimal shaping required repositioning of the lateral ends of the flaps superiorly, which would position the ipsilateral SIEA hemi-flap pedicle lateral to and out of reach of the IM vessels. This problem was overcome by turning the SIEA flap on its long axis, allowing the pedicle to sit medially with the lateral end of the flap positioned superiorly. The de-epithelialized SIEA flap dermis was in direct contact with the chest wall, enabling its fixation. This method of flap inset provides a valuable solution for medializing the SIEA pedicle while maintaining an aesthetically satisfactory orientation. This technique could be used in ipsilateral SIEA flap breast reconstructions that do not require a skin paddle, as with stacked flaps or following nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Background: Preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the abdominal wall vessels is used when planning free flap breast reconstruction (FFBR) because it provides a surgical road map which facilitates flap harvest. However, there are few reports on the effect of abnormal findings on the operative plan. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of all FFBRs performed at a tertiary referral center over a 6-year period (November 2011 to June 2017). One consultant radiologist reported on the findings. Details on patient demographics, CTA reports, and intraoperative details were collected. Results: Two hundred patients received preoperative CTAs. Fourteen percent of patients (n=28) had abnormal findings. Of these findings, 18% were vascular anomalies; 36% tumorrelated and 46% were “miscellaneous.” In four patients, findings subsequently prevented surgery; they comprised a mesenteric artery aneurysm, absent deep inferior epigastric (DIE) vessels, bilateral occluded DIE arteries, and significant bone metastases. Another patient had no suitable vessels for a free flap and the surgical plan converted to a pedicled transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap. The remaining incidental findings had no impact on the surgical plan or appropriateness of FFBR. More than one in 10 of those with abnormal findings went on to have further imaging before their operation. Conclusions CTA in FFBR can have a wider impact than facilitating surgical planning and reducing operative times. Incidental findings can influence the surgical plan, and in some instances, avoid doomed-to-fail and unsafe surgery. It is therefore important that these scans are reported by an experienced radiologist.