Internal Mammary Artery and Vein Perforator Vessels as Troubleshooter Recipient Vessels.
Journal
Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open
ISSN: 2169-7574
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101622231
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
27
10
2018
accepted:
18
12
2018
entrez:
3
5
2019
pubmed:
3
5
2019
medline:
3
5
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In autologous breast reconstruction, the internal mammary artery (IMA) and internal mammary vein (IMV) are the standard recipient vessels. Recently, the perforator vessels of the IMA and IMV were found to be a safe alternative as recipient vessels cause less morbidity and allow adequate flap. We describe 2 cases in which the IMA and IMV perforators were used as additional recipient vessels to overcome intraoperatively occurred complications. The IMA and IMV perforators have some advantages over the IMA/IMV: (1) the dissection is done superficially and directly from the mastectomy site. Flap positioning is facilitated. (2) There is no need to remove a rib, which reduces postoperative pain and possible contour deformities. (3) Possible injuries to the pleura are avoided. (4) The IMA is spared for possible cardiac revascularization. Disadvantages can be that (1) the IMA perforators are not always present with the required caliber, (2) the position of the perforators is not suitable to adequately position the flap, and (3) dissection of the IMA perforators and their anastomoses has a learning curve. In the presented cases, the IMA and IMV perforators have proven to offer a simple solution to avoid complications. The additional dissection is done from the same recipient site, and there is no further dissection or incision necessary at the axilla or to explore the cephalic vein. This keeps morbidity and operation time low. Therefore, we suggest keeping the IMA and IMV perforators in mind not only as primary recipient vessels but also as a possible solution for intraoperatively occurred complications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31044119
doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002148
pmc: PMC6467637
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e2148Références
Br J Plast Surg. 2004 Apr;57(3):258-65
pubmed: 15006528
Ann Plast Surg. 2004 Oct;53(4):311-6
pubmed: 15385762
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007 Dec;120(7):1769-73
pubmed: 18090738
Eplasty. 2010 Apr 30;10:e32
pubmed: 20458353
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jan;127(1):34-40
pubmed: 21200197
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Oct;128(4):225e-232e
pubmed: 21921733
Ann Plast Surg. 2013 Nov;71(5):533-7
pubmed: 22868328
Ann Plast Surg. 2015 Apr;74(4):447-53
pubmed: 24051455
Microsurgery. 2015 Jan;35(1):34-8
pubmed: 24782202
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014 Jun 06;2(5):e141
pubmed: 25289334
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016 Dec 13;4(12):e1144
pubmed: 28293504
Gland Surg. 2017 Aug;6(4):375-379
pubmed: 28861378
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Nov;140(5):884-886
pubmed: 29068920