Diep flap sentinel skin paddle positioning algorithm

Although clinical examination alone or in combination with other techniques is the only ubiquitous method for flap monitoring, it becomes problematic with buried free-tissue transfer. We present a DIEP flap sentinel skin paddle (SSP) positioning algorithm and its reliability is also investigated using a standardized monitoring protocol. All DIEP flaps were monitored with hand-held Doppler examination and clinical observation beginning immediately after surgery in recovery room and continued postoperatively at the ward. Skin paddle (SP) position was preoperatively drawn following mastectomy type incisions; in skin-sparing mastectomies types I–III a small SP (sSP) replaces nipple– areola complex; in skin-sparing mastectomy type IV, SSP is positioned between wise-pattern branches while in type V between medial/lateral branches. In case of nipple-sparing mastectomy SSP is positioned at inframammary fold or in lateral/medial branches of omega/ inverted omega incision if used. Three hundred

Although clinical examination alone or in combination with other techniques is the only ubiquitous method for flap monitoring, it becomes problematic with buried free-tissue transfer. We present a DIEP flap sentinel skin paddle (SSP) positioning algorithm and its reliability is also investigated using a standardized monitoring protocol. All DIEP flaps were monitored with hand-held Doppler examination and clinical observation beginning immediately after surgery in recovery room and continued postoperatively at the ward. Skin paddle (SP) position was preoperatively drawn following mastectomy type incisions; in skin-sparing mastectomies types I-III a small SP (sSP) replaces nipple-areola complex; in skin-sparing mastectomy type IV, SSP is positioned between wise-pattern branches while in type V between medial/lateral branches. In case of nipple-sparing mastectomy SSP is positioned at inframammary fold or in lateral/medial branches of omega/inverted omega incision if used. Three hundred forty-seven DIEP flap breast reconstructions were reviewed and stratified according to SP type into group A including 216 flaps with large SP and group B including 131 flaps with SSP and sSP. Sixteen flaps (4.6%) were taken back for pedicle compromise, 13 of which were salvaged (81.25%), 11 among 13 from group A and 2 among 3 from group B. There was no statistical difference between the groups concerning microvascular complication rate (P=0.108), and time until take-back (P=0.521) and flap salvage rate (P=0.473) resulted independent of SP type. Our results suggest that early detection of perfusion impairment and successful flaps salvage could be achieved using SSP for buried DIEP flap monitoring, without adjunctive expensive monitoring tests. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.