↓ Skip to main content

Decision Making in Double-Pedicled DIEP and SIEA Abdominal Free Flap Breast Reconstructions: An Algorithmic Approach and Comprehensive Classification

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Surgery, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Decision Making in Double-Pedicled DIEP and SIEA Abdominal Free Flap Breast Reconstructions: An Algorithmic Approach and Comprehensive Classification
Published in
Frontiers in Surgery, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fsurg.2015.00049
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles M. Malata, Nicholas G. Rabey

Abstract

The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator free flap is the gold standard for autologous breast reconstruction. However, using a single vascular pedicle may not yield sufficient tissue in patients with midline scars or insufficient lower abdominal pannus. Double-pedicled free flaps overcome this problem using different vascular arrangements to harvest the entire lower abdominal flap. The literature is, however, sparse regarding technique selection. We therefore reviewed our experience in order to formulate an algorithm and comprehensive classification for this purpose. All patients undergoing unilateral double-pedicled abdominal perforator free flap breast reconstruction (AFFBR) by a single surgeon (CMM) over 40 months were reviewed from a prospectively collected database. Of the 112 consecutive breast free flaps performed, 25 (22%) utilised two vascular pedicles. The mean patient age was 45 years (range = 27-54). All flaps, but one (which used the thoracodorsal system), were anastomosed to the internal mammary vessels using the rib-preservation technique. The surgical duration was 656 min (range = 468-690 min). The median flap weight was 618 g (range = 432-1275 g) and the mastectomy weight was 445 g (range = 220-896 g). All flaps were successful and only three patients requested minor liposuction to reduce and reshape their reconstructed breasts. Bipedicled free abdominal perforator flaps, employed in a fifth of all our AFFBRs, are a reliable and safe option for unilateral breast reconstruction. They, however, necessitate clear indications to justify the additional technical complexity and surgical duration. Our algorithm and comprehensive classification facilitate technique selection for the anastomotic permutations and successful execution of these operations. Therapeutic level IV.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 21%
Other 5 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 55%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 7 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,829
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#919
of 2,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,669
of 284,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#9
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,866 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,375 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.