The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative Anatomy

Background:. Although abdominally based flaps continue to be the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction, alternative donor sites are necessary when the abdominal region is unavailable or inadequate for flap harvest. In this case, thigh-based flaps, such as the profunda artery perforator...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Aneesh Karir, MD, Michael J. Stein, MD, FRCSC, Jing Zhang, MD, PhD, FRCSC
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer 2021-04-01
Series:Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
Online Access:http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003512
id doaj-7f12d4acee954afc8ecfc46669322b34
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7f12d4acee954afc8ecfc46669322b342021-04-26T05:12:48ZengWolters KluwerPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open2169-75742021-04-0194e351210.1097/GOX.0000000000003512202104000-00023The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative AnatomyAneesh Karir, MD0Michael J. Stein, MD, FRCSC1Jing Zhang, MD, PhD, FRCSC2From the * Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada† The Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.† The Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.Background:. Although abdominally based flaps continue to be the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction, alternative donor sites are necessary when the abdominal region is unavailable or inadequate for flap harvest. In this case, thigh-based flaps, such as the profunda artery perforator (PAP), transverse upper gracilis (TUG), or newly described TUGPAP, are thought to be reliable with low morbidity and satisfactory cosmesis. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of breast reconstruction with PAP, TUG, or TUGPAP, and present anatomy and surgical techniques through illustrative examples. Methods:. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Articles were included if they used a PAP, TUG, or TUGPAP flap for oncologic, traumatic, or congenital breast reconstruction in patients 18 years or older. Results:. Forty-nine studies met inclusion criteria. Seven hundred five patients underwent 906 breast reconstructions with 1037 flaps (755 TUG, 230 PAP, and 52 TUGPAP). Mean patient age was 45.9 years. The mean flap weight for TUG, PAP, and TUGPAP flaps were 323.4, 346.9, and 437.0 g, respectively. The most common recipient vessel was the internal mammary artery in 821 flaps. The overall flap survival rate was 97.2% (1008/1037). TUG flaps had a significantly higher recipient and donor complication rate compared with both PAP (recipient: 18.1% versus 7.8%, P = 0.0001; donor: 25.8% versus 7.0%, P < 0.00001) and TUGPAP flaps (recipient: 18.1% versus 2.0%, P < 0.001; donor: 25.8% versus 7.7%, P < 0.01). Conclusion:. The TUGPAP flap is a safe and effective alternative for autologous breast reconstruction when the abdominal donor site is unavailable.http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003512
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Aneesh Karir, MD
Michael J. Stein, MD, FRCSC
Jing Zhang, MD, PhD, FRCSC
spellingShingle Aneesh Karir, MD
Michael J. Stein, MD, FRCSC
Jing Zhang, MD, PhD, FRCSC
The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative Anatomy
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
author_facet Aneesh Karir, MD
Michael J. Stein, MD, FRCSC
Jing Zhang, MD, PhD, FRCSC
author_sort Aneesh Karir, MD
title The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative Anatomy
title_short The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative Anatomy
title_full The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative Anatomy
title_fullStr The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative Anatomy
title_full_unstemmed The Conjoined TUGPAP Flap for Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Illustrative Anatomy
title_sort conjoined tugpap flap for breast reconstruction: systematic review and illustrative anatomy
publisher Wolters Kluwer
series Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
issn 2169-7574
publishDate 2021-04-01
description Background:. Although abdominally based flaps continue to be the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction, alternative donor sites are necessary when the abdominal region is unavailable or inadequate for flap harvest. In this case, thigh-based flaps, such as the profunda artery perforator (PAP), transverse upper gracilis (TUG), or newly described TUGPAP, are thought to be reliable with low morbidity and satisfactory cosmesis. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of breast reconstruction with PAP, TUG, or TUGPAP, and present anatomy and surgical techniques through illustrative examples. Methods:. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Articles were included if they used a PAP, TUG, or TUGPAP flap for oncologic, traumatic, or congenital breast reconstruction in patients 18 years or older. Results:. Forty-nine studies met inclusion criteria. Seven hundred five patients underwent 906 breast reconstructions with 1037 flaps (755 TUG, 230 PAP, and 52 TUGPAP). Mean patient age was 45.9 years. The mean flap weight for TUG, PAP, and TUGPAP flaps were 323.4, 346.9, and 437.0 g, respectively. The most common recipient vessel was the internal mammary artery in 821 flaps. The overall flap survival rate was 97.2% (1008/1037). TUG flaps had a significantly higher recipient and donor complication rate compared with both PAP (recipient: 18.1% versus 7.8%, P = 0.0001; donor: 25.8% versus 7.0%, P < 0.00001) and TUGPAP flaps (recipient: 18.1% versus 2.0%, P < 0.001; donor: 25.8% versus 7.7%, P < 0.01). Conclusion:. The TUGPAP flap is a safe and effective alternative for autologous breast reconstruction when the abdominal donor site is unavailable.
url http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003512
work_keys_str_mv AT aneeshkarirmd theconjoinedtugpapflapforbreastreconstructionsystematicreviewandillustrativeanatomy
AT michaeljsteinmdfrcsc theconjoinedtugpapflapforbreastreconstructionsystematicreviewandillustrativeanatomy
AT jingzhangmdphdfrcsc theconjoinedtugpapflapforbreastreconstructionsystematicreviewandillustrativeanatomy
AT aneeshkarirmd conjoinedtugpapflapforbreastreconstructionsystematicreviewandillustrativeanatomy
AT michaeljsteinmdfrcsc conjoinedtugpapflapforbreastreconstructionsystematicreviewandillustrativeanatomy
AT jingzhangmdphdfrcsc conjoinedtugpapflapforbreastreconstructionsystematicreviewandillustrativeanatomy
_version_ 1721508901688442880