Volume 63, Issue 4 , Pages 648-654, April 2010
Performing two DIEP flaps in a working day: an achievable and reproducible practice
Summary
Background
While the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is a reliable technique for autologous breast reconstruction, the meticulous dissection of perforators may require lengthy operative times. In our unit, we have performed 600 free flaps for breast reconstruction over 8 years and have reduced operative times with a combination of preoperative computed tomographic angiography (CTA), various anastomotic techniques and the Cook–Swartz implantable Doppler probe for perfusion monitoring. We sought to assess the feasibility of performing two DIEP flaps within the working hours of a single day.
Methods
A review of 101 consecutive patients undergoing DIEP flap breast reconstruction in a 12-month period was performed, comparing one DIEP flap per day (n
=
43) to two DIEP flaps per day (n
=
58). Complications, outcomes and techniques used were critically analysed. For cases of two DIEP flaps per day, a comparison was made between the use of two separate operating theatres (n
=
44) and a single consecutive theatre (n
=
14).
Results
Complications did not increase when two DIEP flaps were performed in a single working day. The use of vascular closure staple (VCS) sutures and ring couplers resulted in statistically significant reductions in anastomotic times. The use of two separate theatres for performing two DIEP flaps resulted in a reduction of 59
min in operative time per case (p
=
0.004).
Conclusion
Two DIEP flaps can be safely and routinely performed within the hours of a single working day. By minimising operative times, these techniques can improve productivity and substantially decrease surgeon fatigue.
Keywords: Breast reconstruction, Computed tomographic angiography, Cook–Swartz probe, Deep inferior epigastric artery, Implantable Doppler probe, Perforator flap
To access this article, please choose from the options below
PII: S1748-6815(09)00069-2
doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2009.01.015
© 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc.
Volume 63, Issue 4 , Pages 648-654, April 2010
