Abdominal wall following free TRAM or DIEP flap reconstruction: a meta-analysis and critical review.
Anahtar kelimeler
Öz
BACKGROUND
Numerous studies compare techniques for free flap breast reconstruction techniques, with no consensus regarding differences in complication rates. This study compared the risk of fat necrosis, partial flap loss, total flap loss, abdominal bulge, laxity, or weakness, and abdominal hernia after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap surgery for breast reconstruction.
METHODS
A MEDLINE and manual search of English-language articles on DIEP and free TRAM flap surgery published up to April of 2007 yielded 338 citations. Two levels of screening identified 37 relevant studies. The Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects and DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to perform the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Six studies reporting both DIEP and free TRAM flap outcomes were used to estimate pooled relative risks of complications and confidence intervals. There was a twofold increase in the risk of fat necrosis (relative risk, 1.94; 95 percent CI, 1.28 to 2.93) and flap loss (relative risk, 2.05; 95 percent CI, 1.16 to 3.61) in DIEP patients compared with free TRAM patients. There was no difference in the risk for fat necrosis when the analysis was limited to studies using muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps (relative risk, 0.91; 95 percent CI, 0.47 to 1.78). DIEP patients had one-half the risk of abdominal bulge or hernia (relative risk, 0.49; 95 percent CI, 0.28 to 0.86). Sixteen studies reporting DIEP outcomes and 23 studies reporting free TRAM outcomes were used to estimate pooled complication rates. Pooled flap-related complication rates were higher in DIEP patients, whereas donor-site morbidity was higher in free TRAM patients.
CONCLUSIONS
This analysis suggests that the DIEP flap reduces abdominal morbidity but increases flap-related complications compared with the free TRAM flap in breast reconstruction.
