Top

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

Published in:

01-04-2012 | Original Article

DIEP Flap Donor Site Versus Elective Abdominoplasty Short-term Complication Rates: A Meta-analysis

Authors: Marzia Salgarello, Damiano Tambasco, Eugenio Farallo

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 2/2012

Abstract

Background

Although over the past decade the DIEP flap has emerged as one of the preferred choices for autologous breast reconstruction and the donor-site closure has much in common with the standard abdominoplasty technique, reports on comparisons of the complication rates between DIEP and elective abdominoplasty patients are not currently available. The purpose of this study was to compare DIEP donor-site and elective abdominoplasty short-term complications rates, in support of surgical choices.

Methods

Searches of MEDLINE and CENTRAL for English language articles on DIEP and elective abdominoplasty (EA) published from January 1999 through December 2009 identified 33 studies that met the inclusion criteria and included 3,937 patients. A random-effects model was used to calculate the average complication rate in the literature.

Results

The rate of seroma/hematoma in EA (16.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.2–20.9%) was approximately four times the rate in DIEP flap patients (3.7%, 95% CI = 1.5–8.8%) was found from analyzing the data under a random-effects model. No substantial differences in the rates of infection, abdominal/umbilical necrosis, or wound dehiscence/delayed healing between the two series of patients were detected.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis reveals that DIEP donor-site complication rates were comparable to those in elective abdominoplasty, and, the rate of seroma in DIEP is an even lower than that of one of the most performed procedures in plastic surgery. We argue that patients presenting for a DIEP flap should be informed about this interesting comparison.

Blondeel PN (1999) One hundred free DIEP flap breast reconstructions: a personal experience. Br J Plast Surg 52:104–111PubMedCrossRef

Hamdi M, Weiler-Mithoff EM, Webster MH (1999) Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap in breast reconstruction: experience with the first 50 flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 103:86–95PubMedCrossRef

Keller A (2001) The deep inferior epigastric perforator free flap for breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 46:474–479PubMedCrossRef

Gill PS, Hunt JP, Guerra AB et al (2004) A 10-year retrospective review of 758 DIEP flaps for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 113:1153–1160PubMedCrossRef

Munhoz AM, Sturtz G, Montag E et al (2005) Clinical outcome of abdominal wall after DIEP flap harvesting and immediate application of abdominoplasty techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 116:1881–1893PubMedCrossRef

Nahabedian MY, Tsangaris T, Momen B (2005) Breast reconstruction with the DIEP flap or the muscle-sparing (MS-2) free TRAM flap: is there a difference? Plast Reconstr Surg 115:436–444PubMedCrossRef

Bajaj AK, Chevray PM, Chang DW (2006) Comparison of donor-site complications and functional outcomes in free muscle-sparing TRAM flap and free DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:737–746PubMedCrossRef

Bonde CT, Christensen DE, Elberg JJ (2006) Ten years’ experience of free flaps for breast reconstruction in a Danish microsurgical centre: an audit. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 40:8–12PubMedCrossRef

Garvey PB, Buchel EW, Pockaj BA et al (2006) DIEP and pedicled TRAM flaps: a comparison of outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:1711–1719PubMedCrossRef

10.

Scheer AS, Novak CB, Neligan PC, Lipa JE (2006) Complications associated with breast reconstruction using a perforator flap compared with a free TRAM flap. Ann Plast Surg 56:355–358PubMedCrossRef

11.

Lindsey JT (2007) Integrating the DIEP and muscle-sparing (MS-2) free TRAM techniques optimizes surgical outcomes: presentation of an algorithm for microsurgical breast reconstruction based on perforator anatomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:18–27PubMedCrossRef

12.

Tran NV, Buchel EW, Convery PA (2007) Microvascular complications of DIEP flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:1397–1405PubMedCrossRef

13.

Yan XQ, Yang HY, Zhao YM, You L, Xu J (2007) Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for breast reconstruction: experience with 43 flaps. Chin Med J 120:380–384PubMed

14.

Drazan L, Vesely J, Hyza P et al (2008) Bilateral breast reconstruction with DIEP flaps: 4 years’ experience. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 61:1309–1315PubMedCrossRef

15.

Hofer SO, Damen TH, Mureau MA, Rakhorst HA, Roche NA (2007) A critical review of perioperative complications in 175 free deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstructions. Ann Plast Surg 59:137–142PubMedCrossRef

16.

Vyas RM, Dickinson BP, Fastekjian JH, Watson JP, Dalio AL, Crisera CA (2008) Risk factors for abdominal donor-site morbidity in free flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1519–1526PubMedCrossRef

17.

Parrett BM, Caterson SA, Tobias AM, Lee BT (2008) DIEP flaps in women with abdominal scars: are complication rates affected? Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1527–1531PubMedCrossRef

18.

Takeishi M, Fujimoto M, Ishida K, Makino Y (2008) Muscle sparing-2 transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap for breast reconstruction: a comparison with deep inferior epigastric perforator flap. Microsurgery 28:650–655PubMedCrossRef

19.

Xu H, Dong J, Wang T (2009) Bipedicle deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for unilateral breast reconstruction: seven years’ experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:1797–1807PubMedCrossRef

20.

Chaouat M, Levan P, Lalanne B, Buisson T, Nicolau P, Mimoun M (2008) Abdominal dermolipectomies: early postoperative complications and long-term unfavorable results. Plast Reconstr Surg 106:1614–1618

21.

Ramirez OM (2000) Abdominoplasty and abdominal wall rehabilitation: a comprehensive approach. Plast Reconstr Surg 10:425–435

22.

van Uchelen JH, Werker PM, Kon M (2001) Complications of abdominoplasty in 86 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:1869–1873PubMedCrossRef

23.

Kryger ZB, Fine NA, Mustoe TA (2004) The outcome of abdominoplasty performed under conscious sedation: six-year experience in 153 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 113:1807–1817PubMedCrossRef

24.

Kim J, Stevenson TR (2006) Abdominoplasty, liposuction of the flanks, and obesity: analyzing risk factors for seroma formation. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:773–779PubMedCrossRef

25.

Spiegelman JI, Levine RH (2006) Abdominoplasty: a comparison of outpatient and inpatient procedures shows that it is a safe and effective procedure for outpatients in an office-based surgery clinic. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:517–522PubMedCrossRef

26.

Stevens WG, Cohen R, Vath SD, Stoker DA, Hirsch EM (2006) Is it safe to combine abdominoplasty with elective breast surgery? A review of 151 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:207–212PubMedCrossRef

27.

Neaman KC, Hansen JE (2007) Analysis of complications from abdominoplasty: a review of 206 cases at a university hospital. Ann Plast Surg 58:292–298PubMedCrossRef

28.

Khan UD (2008) Risk of seroma with simultaneous liposuction and abdominoplasty and the role of progressive tension sutures. Aesthetic Plast Surg 32:93–99PubMedCrossRef

29.

Smith MM, Hovsepian RV, Markarian MK et al (2008) Continuous-infusion local anesthetic pain pump use and seroma formation with abdominal procedures: is there a correlation? Plast Reconstr Surg 122:1425–1430PubMedCrossRef

30.

Greco JA 3rd, Castaldo ET, Nanney LB et al (2008) The effect of weight loss surgery and body mass index on wound complications after abdominal contouring operations. Ann Plast Surg 61:235–242PubMedCrossRef

31.

Heller JB, Teng E, Knoll BI, Persing J (2008) Outcome analysis of combined lipoabdominoplasty versus conventional abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1821–1829PubMedCrossRef

32.

Brink RR, Beck JB, Anderson CM, Lewis AC (2009) Abdominoplasty with direct resection of deep fat. Plast Reconstr Surg 123:1597–1603PubMedCrossRef

33.

Momeni A, Heier M, Bannasch H, Stark GB (2009) Complications in abdominoplasty: a risk factor analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 62:1250–1254PubMedCrossRef

34.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21:1539–1558PubMedCrossRef

35.

Najera RM, Asheld W, Sayeed SM, Glickman LT (2011) Comparison of seroma formation following abdominoplasty with or without liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:417–422PubMedCrossRef

36.

Stevens WG, Spring MA, Stoker DA, Cohen R, Vath SD, Hirsch EM (2007) Ten years of outpatient abdominoplasties: safe and effective. Aesthet Surg J 27:269–275PubMedCrossRef

37.

Sterne JA, Egger M, Smith GD (2001) Systematic reviews in health care: investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. BMJ 323:101–105PubMedCrossRef

38.

Buck D, Mustoe T (2010) An evidence-based approach to abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 126:2189–2195PubMedCrossRef

Title: DIEP Flap Donor Site Versus Elective Abdominoplasty Short-term Complication Rates: A Meta-analysis
Authors: Marzia Salgarello
Damiano Tambasco
Eugenio Farallo
Publication date: 01-04-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 2/2012
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-011-9804-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

DIEP Flap Donor Site Versus Elective Abdominoplasty Short-term Complication Rates: A Meta-analysis

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2012

Anatomical Variations of the Upper Lateral Cartilages and Their Implications in Rhinoplasty

2011 Reviewer Thank You

The Direct Brow-Lift Using the Flat Incision Technique

Long-Term Complications of Polyethylene Glycol Injection to the Face

Scarpa Fascia or Rectus Fascia in Abdominoplasty Flap Elevation: A Prospective Clinical Trial

Bilateral Calf Augmentation for Aesthetic Purposes