Objective To summarize the characteristics of IgG4 related disease (IgG4-RD),and to avoid unnecessary surgical procedures due to misdiagnosis.Methods Retrospective analysis of the clinical data of one case of IgG4 related disease involving the renal pelvis in our hospital,and the clinical features of IgG4 related disease involving the renal pelvis were reviewed and discussed.A 56-year-old man presented with microscopic hematuria,CT showed right renal pelvis and ureteral wall thickening,local soft tissue density,post contrast CT showed low-density renal pelvic mass and the wall of the ureter-pelvic was irregularly thicken,indicating renal pelvic cancer and lymph node metastasis.PET-CT (18F-FDG) findings indicated that the renal pelvic mass was a malignant tumor,because the glucose metabolism was very high.The preoperative diagnosis was retroperitoneal lesion,suspecting renal pelvic carcinoma or lymphoma.The patient underwent 3D laparoscopic nephroureterectomy with out preoperative biopsy.During operation,we found extensive enlargement of the right renal portal and retroperitoneal lymph nodes,including that the renal portal and the renal pelvis mass had a serious adhesion to the vena cava and renal arterial vein.Results Postoperative pathology results revealed lymphatic tissue hyperplasia and germinal center formation.Immunohistochemical staining showed that most plasma cells positive expression of IgG4 (IgG4 ＞ 40％,IgG4 ＞ 100/HPF),reactive hyperplasia of lymph node,considering the IgG4 related diseases.Serum IgG4 level was 15.2 g/L (0.03-2.01 g/L)after operation.Combined with serological examination,IgG4 related disease was confirmed.There was no evidence of IgG4-related disease at any other site during the follow up period,thereby obviating the need for any additional therapy.Conclusions IgG4 related disease is a novel clinical disease entity characterized by elevated serum IgG4 concentration and tumefaction or tissue infiltration by IgG4-positive plasma cells,which leads to the enlargement of the organ or nodular/proliferative lesions.The disease can be revealed as a soft tissue tumor of the renal pelvis and be misdiagnosed as malignant tumor.Surgical intervention could be avoided according to the correct diagnosis.

Objective:This study aimed to explore the clinical application value of the indication selection criteria for bi-pedicled deep inferior epigastric arterial perforator flap(DIEP) versus pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap(TRAM) combined with DIEP for breast reconstruction.Methods:The clinical data of patients who underwent delayed bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgery in the Department of Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery and Department of Mammoplasty, Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from January 2008 to April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the indications for each procedure, corresponding blood supply source was selected. Subsequently, patients were divided into two groups: bi-pedicled DIEP group and pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group according to the type of blood supply source. The indication selection criteria for pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap was as follows: lack of two groups of recipient vessels; no dominant perforator in the abdominal donor site; previous abdominal liposuction or abdominal surgery with large dissection range and severe scar; patients were unable to tolerate prolonged surgery or had high risk factors for microsurgery. A comparison of breast reconstruction surgery characteristics was conducted between the two groups. Independent-samples t-test, rank sum test, Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact probability method were used to analyze various data including age, body mass index (BMI), time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy, history of chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length, preoperative and postoperative conditions, as well as postoperative complications. Statistical significance was defined at P<0.05. Results:A total of 54 patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction were included in this study with a mean age of 42.2 years (range, 30-59 years). The pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group consisted of 21 patients with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 33-56 years) while the bi-pedicled DIEP group comprised 33 patients with a mean age of 41.8 years (30-59 years). Out of the 54 patients, a total of 38 were eventually followed up, comprising 14 in the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and 24 in the bi-pedicled DIEP group. The average follow-up duration for the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group was 42 months (range, 6-69 months). Abdominal bulge occurred in one patient, while another patient experienced abdominal hernia. The average follow-up duration for the bi-pedicled DIEP group was 47 months (6-179 months), with no reported cases of abdominal bulge or abdominal hernia. There were no statistically significant differences observed between the two groups regarding age, BMI, time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy or chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length or time to ambulation (all P>0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference noted in duration of surgery between the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and bi-pedicled DIEP group [6.0(5.5-6.5) hours vs. 8.5(8.0-8.8) hours] ( P<0.01). Comparison analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in terms of partial flap necrosis (0/21 vs. 1/33), abdominal incision dehiscence (2/21 vs. 2/33), abdominal bulge (1/14 vs. 0 /24) or abdominal hernia (1/1 vs. 0/24) between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:For patients who needed bilateral vascular pedicled lower abdominal wall for breast reconstruction, utilizing a pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap did not increase surgical complication risks. The proposed indication selection criteria for using a pedicled TRAM + DIEP combined flap outlined in this study could serve as guidance when choosing methods for bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction.

Objective:This study aimed to explore the clinical application value of the indication selection criteria for bi-pedicled deep inferior epigastric arterial perforator flap(DIEP) versus pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap(TRAM) combined with DIEP for breast reconstruction.Methods:The clinical data of patients who underwent delayed bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgery in the Department of Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery and Department of Mammoplasty, Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from January 2008 to April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the indications for each procedure, corresponding blood supply source was selected. Subsequently, patients were divided into two groups: bi-pedicled DIEP group and pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group according to the type of blood supply source. The indication selection criteria for pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap was as follows: lack of two groups of recipient vessels; no dominant perforator in the abdominal donor site; previous abdominal liposuction or abdominal surgery with large dissection range and severe scar; patients were unable to tolerate prolonged surgery or had high risk factors for microsurgery. A comparison of breast reconstruction surgery characteristics was conducted between the two groups. Independent-samples t-test, rank sum test, Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact probability method were used to analyze various data including age, body mass index (BMI), time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy, history of chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length, preoperative and postoperative conditions, as well as postoperative complications. Statistical significance was defined at P<0.05. Results:A total of 54 patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction were included in this study with a mean age of 42.2 years (range, 30-59 years). The pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group consisted of 21 patients with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 33-56 years) while the bi-pedicled DIEP group comprised 33 patients with a mean age of 41.8 years (30-59 years). Out of the 54 patients, a total of 38 were eventually followed up, comprising 14 in the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and 24 in the bi-pedicled DIEP group. The average follow-up duration for the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group was 42 months (range, 6-69 months). Abdominal bulge occurred in one patient, while another patient experienced abdominal hernia. The average follow-up duration for the bi-pedicled DIEP group was 47 months (6-179 months), with no reported cases of abdominal bulge or abdominal hernia. There were no statistically significant differences observed between the two groups regarding age, BMI, time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy or chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length or time to ambulation (all P>0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference noted in duration of surgery between the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and bi-pedicled DIEP group [6.0(5.5-6.5) hours vs. 8.5(8.0-8.8) hours] ( P<0.01). Comparison analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in terms of partial flap necrosis (0/21 vs. 1/33), abdominal incision dehiscence (2/21 vs. 2/33), abdominal bulge (1/14 vs. 0 /24) or abdominal hernia (1/1 vs. 0/24) between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:For patients who needed bilateral vascular pedicled lower abdominal wall for breast reconstruction, utilizing a pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap did not increase surgical complication risks. The proposed indication selection criteria for using a pedicled TRAM + DIEP combined flap outlined in this study could serve as guidance when choosing methods for bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction.

In deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction, diffuse venous congestion caused by non-pedicle causes, such as lack of effective communication between deep and superficial venous systems, is very rare. In this paper, a case of young woman who underwent DIEP breast reconstruction after breast cancer mastectomy was reported. Imaging findings showed the absence of bilateral dominant perforators and the lack of communication between the deep and superficial venous system. During operation, the superficial inferior epigastric vessels were dissected in advance. Indocyanine green angiography showed arterial perfusion insufficiency and venous congestion.The flap was successfully salvaged by supercharging/draining with superficial inferior epigastric vessels, preserving the abdominal function of the young patient to the greatest extent.

In deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction, diffuse venous congestion caused by non-pedicle causes, such as lack of effective communication between deep and superficial venous systems, is very rare. In this paper, a case of young woman who underwent DIEP breast reconstruction after breast cancer mastectomy was reported. Imaging findings showed the absence of bilateral dominant perforators and the lack of communication between the deep and superficial venous system. During operation, the superficial inferior epigastric vessels were dissected in advance. Indocyanine green angiography showed arterial perfusion insufficiency and venous congestion.The flap was successfully salvaged by supercharging/draining with superficial inferior epigastric vessels, preserving the abdominal function of the young patient to the greatest extent.