Strategies for prevention and management of partial flap loss or fat necrosis in microvascular autologous breast reconstruction

Abstract

Partial flap loss (skin involved) or fat necrosis following autologous breast reconstruction remains a dreaded postoperative complication despite significant advances in microsurgical techniques. Several strategies have been proposed in the preoperative and intraoperative period to prevent this complication ranging from preoperative imaging, intra-operative tissue perfusion assessment, appropriate perforator selection (location and number), maximizing inflow and outflow with additional anastomoses and/or pedicles, and minimizing ischemia time. Postoperative management of partial flap loss (when there is skin involvement) and fat necrosis remains a challenge, with very little published data focusing on classification, timing, and techniques. Early intervention versus close observation may depend on multiple patient factors and the degree or volume of necrosis. Secondary intervention options include hyperbaric oxygen therapy, fat aeration with a needle, liposuction, fat grafting, addition of another flap or implant, depending on the nature of the defect. This review summarizes the current evidence for each of these strategies to help the current surgeon understand their options in preventing and managing patients suffering from partial flap loss.

Keywords

Partial flap loss / fat necrosis / prevention of fat necrosis

References

[1] Khansa I,Patel PP,Miller MJ.Fat necrosis in autologous abdomen-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review.Plast Reconstr Surg2013;131:443-52

[2] Albino FP,Ling MN.Irradiated autologous breast reconstructions: effects of patient factors and treatment variables.Plast Reconstr Surg2010;126:12-6

[3] Haddock NT,Teotia SS.Efficiency in DIEP flap breast reconstruction: the real benefit of computed tomographic angiography imaging.Plast Reconstr Surg2020;146:719-23

[4] Kim H,Wiraatmadja ES.Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging-based breast volumetry for immediate breast reconstruction.Aesthetic Plast Surg2015;39:369-76

[5] Rozen WM.Improving outcomes in autologous breast reconstruction.Aesthetic Plast Surg2009;33:327-35

[6] Wade RG,Wormald JCR,Figus A.Perforator mapping reduces the operative time of DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance angiography.J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg2018;71:468-77

[7] Wagner RD,Mehra NV.Incidental findings in CT and MR angiography for preoperative planning in DIEP flap breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open2020;8:e3159 PMCID:PMC7647637

[8] Davis CR,Tillett RL,Wilson SM.Predicting venous congestion before DIEP breast reconstruction by identifying atypical venous connections on preoperative CTA imaging.Microsurgery2019;39:24-31

[9] Lauritzen E.Use of Indocyanine green angiography decreases the risk of complications in autologous- and implant-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg2021;74:1703-17

[10] Hembd AS,Zhu H,Teotia SS.Intraoperative assessment of DIEP flap breast reconstruction using indocyanine green angiography: reduction of fat necrosis, resection volumes, and postoperative Surveillance.Plast Reconstr Surg2020;146:1e-10e

[11] Momeni A.Intraoperative laser-assisted indocyanine green imaging can reduce the rate of fat necrosis in microsurgical breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg2020;145:507e-13e

[12] Malagón-López P,Carrasco-López C.Intraoperative Indocyanine green angiography for fat necrosis reduction in the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap.Aesthet Surg J2019;39:NP45-54

[13] Parmeshwar N,Kim EA.A Systematic review of the utility of indocyanine angiography in autologous breast reconstruction.Ann Plast Surg2021;86:601-6

[14] Yoo A,Mayo JL.The impact of indocyanine green angiography on fat necrosis in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction.Ann Plast Surg2022;88:415-9

[15] Bailey SH,Wong C.The single dominant medial row perforator DIEP flap in breast reconstruction: three-dimensional perforasome and clinical results.Plast Reconstr Surg2010;126:739-51

[16] Kamali P,Lee BT.Medial row perforators are associated with higher rates of fat necrosis in bilateral DIEP flap breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg2017;140:819e-20e

[17] Garvey PB,Feng L.Perfusion-related complications are similar for DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps harvested on medial or lateral deep inferior epigastric Artery branch perforators for breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg2011;128:581e-9e PMCID:PMC3226762

[18] Wong C,Mojallal A.Perforasomes of the DIEP flap: vascular anatomy of the lateral versus medial row perforators and clinical implications.Plast Reconstr Surg2010;125:772-82

[19] Hembd A,Zhu H.Optimizing perforator selection: a multivariable analysis of predictors for fat necrosis and abdominal morbidity in DIEP flap breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg2018;142:583-92

[20] Baumann DP,Chevray PM.Perforator number predicts fat necrosis in a prospective analysis of breast reconstruction with free TRAM, DIEP, and SIEA flaps.Plast Reconstr Surg2010;125:1335-41

[21] Garvey PB,Liu J,Butler CE.DIEP and MS FTRAM flaps based on both branches of the deep inferior epigastric artery result in fewer perfusion-related complications than single DIEA branch flaps: a study of 1127 patients.Plast Reconstr Surg2012;130:12

[22] Bhullar H,Rozen WM.Fat necrosis after DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a review of perfusion-related causes.Aesthetic Plast Surg2020;44:1454-61

[23] Grover R,Fischer JP,Serletti JM.The impact of perforator number on deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction.Arch Plast Surg2014;41:63-70 PMCID:PMC3915159

[24] Mohan AT,Wang Z,Saint-Cyr M.Techniques and perforator selection in single, dominant diep flap breast reconstruction: algorithmic approach to maximize efficiency and safety.Plast Reconstr Surg2016;138:790e-803e

[25] Garvey PB,Liu J,Butler CE.Balancing flap perfusion & donor site morbidity: an evidence-based approach to optimizing outcomes for free flap breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg2012;130:76.

[26] DellaCroce FJ,Blum CA.Myth-busting the diep flap and an introduction to the abdominal perforator exchange (APEX) breast reconstruction technique: a single-surgeon retrospective review.Plast Reconstr Surg2019;143:992-1008 PMCID:PMC6445603

[27] Ali R,Lin YT.Surgical strategies to salvage the venous compromised deep inferior epigastric perforator flap.Ann Plast Surg2010;65:398-406

[28] Lee KT,Nam SJ.Ischaemic time and fat necrosis in breast reconstruction with a free deep inferior epigastric perforator flap.J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg2013;66:174-81

[29] Könneker S,Jokuszies A.A classification system for fat necrosis in autologous breast reconstruction.Ann Plast Surg2015;74:269

[30] Ellis LJ,Hughes K,Rozen WM.How should we manage women with fat necrosis following autologous breast reconstruction: an algorithmic approach.Breast J2020;26:711-5

[31] Francis A.Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for the compromised graft or flap.Adv Wound Care2017;6:23-32

[32] Hassa A,Colakoglu S,Lee BT.Early results using ultrasound-assisted liposuction as a treatment for fat necrosis in breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg2010;126:762-8