• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

腹壁皮瓣游离乳房重建供区并发症的综合分析。

Comprehensive analysis of donor-site morbidity in abdominally based free flap breast reconstruction.

机构信息

Houston, Texas From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.

出版信息

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Dec;132(6):1383-1391. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a805a3.

DOI:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a805a3
PMID:24005365
Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of factors that might contribute to abdominal donor-site morbidity after abdominally based free flap breast reconstruction.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective analysis of all abdominally based free flap breast reconstructions performed from January of 2000 through December of 2010 at their institution.

RESULTS

Overall, 89 of 1507 patients developed an abdominal bulge/hernia (unilateral: 57 of 1044; bilateral: 32 of 463). A unilateral transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap was significantly more likely to develop an abdominal bulge/hernia than was a muscle-sparing TRAM flap or a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap (9.9 percent versus 3.7 percent versus 5.9 percent; p = 0.004). However, there was no difference in the risk of developing an abdominal bulge/hernia between a muscle-sparing TRAM and a DIEP flap (p = 0.36). Patients who underwent bilateral reconstructions were 1.35 times more likely to develop an abdominal bulge/hernia than patients who underwent unilateral reconstruction, but the difference was not significant. Harvesting more fascia as occurs when both medial and lateral rows are used was significantly associated with need for mesh (p < 0.0001). Overall, placement of mesh for fascia closure reduced the odds of occurrence of bulge/hernia by 70 percent compared with primary fascia closure.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in the risk of developing abdominal bulge/hernia between bilateral versus unilateral breast reconstruction. For abdominally based free flap breast reconstruction, the extent of the fascia harvested, how it is repaired, and the amount of muscle preserved might play an important role in donor-site morbidity.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在全面分析导致腹侧游离皮瓣乳房重建后腹部供区发病率的因素。

方法

作者对 2000 年 1 月至 2010 年 12 月在本机构行腹侧游离皮瓣乳房重建的所有患者进行了回顾性分析。

结果

总体而言,1507 例患者中有 89 例(单侧:57 例;双侧:32 例)出现腹部膨隆/疝。与保留肌肉的横形腹直肌肌皮瓣(TRAM)或腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣(DIEP)相比,单侧 TRAM 皮瓣发生腹部膨隆/疝的风险显著更高(9.9%比 3.7%比 5.9%;p=0.004)。但是,保留肌肉的 TRAM 与 DIEP 皮瓣之间发生腹部膨隆/疝的风险无差异(p=0.36)。行双侧重建的患者发生腹部膨隆/疝的风险是行单侧重建患者的 1.35 倍,但差异无统计学意义。当同时使用内侧和外侧两排时,会增加筋膜的采集量,这与需要使用网片显著相关(p<0.0001)。总体而言,与筋膜直接缝合相比,使用网片关闭筋膜可使膨隆/疝的发生几率降低 70%。

结论

双侧与单侧乳房重建相比,发生腹部膨隆/疝的风险无显著差异。对于腹侧游离皮瓣乳房重建,筋膜的采集范围、修复方式以及保留的肌肉量可能在供区发病率方面发挥重要作用。

临床问题/证据水平:治疗性,III 级。

相似文献

1
Comprehensive analysis of donor-site morbidity in abdominally based free flap breast reconstruction.腹壁皮瓣游离乳房重建供区并发症的综合分析。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Dec;132(6):1383-1391. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a805a3.
2
Inclusion of mesh in donor-site repair of free TRAM and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps yields rates of abdominal complications comparable to those of DIEP flap reconstruction.网片在游离 TRAM 皮瓣和保留肌肉的游离 TRAM 皮瓣供区修复中的应用,其腹部并发症发生率与 DIEP 皮瓣重建相当。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Aug;126(2):367-374. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181de1b7e.
3
Risk factors for abdominal donor-site morbidity in free flap breast reconstruction.游离皮瓣乳房重建术中腹部供区并发症的危险因素。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 May;121(5):1519-1526. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31816b1458.
4
Surgically Treated Hernia following Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Prevalence, Outcomes, and Expenditures.腹部自体乳房重建术后手术治疗的疝:患病率、结局及费用
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Mar;137(3):749-757. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000479931.96538.c5.
5
Postoperative Abdominal Bulge and Hernia Rates in Patients Undergoing Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.接受腹部自体乳房重建患者的术后腹部膨出和疝发生率:系统评价与Meta分析
Ann Plast Surg. 2021 Apr 1;86(4):476-484. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002538.
6
Prospective Evaluation of Obese Patients Undergoing Autologous Abdominal Free Flap Breast Reconstruction.前瞻性评估肥胖患者行自体腹部游离皮瓣乳房再造术。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Aug;142(2):120e-125e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004550.
7
Factors that predict deep inferior epigastric perforator flap donor site hernia and bulge.预测腹壁下深动脉穿支皮瓣供区疝和隆起的因素。
J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2018 Dec;52(6):338-342. doi: 10.1080/2000656X.2018.1498790. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
8
Abdominal donor-site outcomes for medial versus lateral deep inferior epigastric artery branch perforator harvest.腹部供区结局比较:内侧与外侧腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣游离移植。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jun;127(6):2198-2205. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182131caf.
9
Comparison of Phasix, polypropylene, and primary closure of the abdominal donor site after bilateral free flap breast reconstruction: Long-term evaluation of abdominal hernia and bulge formation.对比双侧游离皮瓣乳房重建术后腹部供区采用 Phasix、聚丙烯网片和一期缝合关闭的方法:对腹部疝和膨出形成的长期评估。
Microsurgery. 2020 May;40(4):434-439. doi: 10.1002/micr.30541. Epub 2019 Dec 9.
10
Evaluating mesh use for abdominal donor site closure after deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.评价腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣乳房重建术后应用网片关闭供区的效果:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Microsurgery. 2023 Nov;43(8):855-864. doi: 10.1002/micr.31107. Epub 2023 Sep 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Revolutionizing Breast Reconstruction: The Rise of Hybrid Techniques.乳房重建的变革:混合技术的兴起。
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Aug 9;61(8):1434. doi: 10.3390/medicina61081434.
2
Improving the Patient Experience in Breast Reconstruction: ERAS and Beyond.改善乳房重建患者体验:加速康复外科及其他
J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 7;14(15):5595. doi: 10.3390/jcm14155595.
3
Comparing Minimally Invasive and Conventional Approaches to DIEP Flap Harvest: A Matched-Pair Analysis from a High-Volume Center.比较微创和传统腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣切取方法:来自高容量中心的配对分析
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025 Aug 11. doi: 10.1007/s00266-025-05163-6.
4
Current Modalities in Soft-Tissue Reconstruction and Vascularized Adipose Engineering.软组织重建与血管化脂肪组织工程的当前模式
Biomolecules. 2025 May 28;15(6):780. doi: 10.3390/biom15060780.
5
Not All Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator Flaps Are Created Equal: A Review of Donor-site Morbidity in Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction.并非所有腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣都是一样的:基于腹部的自体乳房重建供区并发症综述
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2025 Feb 11;13(2):e6519. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000006519. eCollection 2025 Feb.
6
Unilateral Versus Bilateral Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.单侧与双侧腹壁下深动脉穿支皮瓣乳房重建:系统评价与Meta分析
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024 Dec 5;12(12):e6359. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000006359. eCollection 2024 Dec.
7
Donor Site Outcomes Following Autologous Breast Reconstruction with DIEP Flap: A Retrospective and Prospective Study in a Single Institution.腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣自体乳房重建术后供区结局:单机构的回顾性和前瞻性研究
Plast Surg (Oakv). 2024 May 20:22925503241255118. doi: 10.1177/22925503241255118.
8
The enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal repair of abdominal bulge after DIEP flap breast reconstruction for breast cancer: a case report.乳腺癌DIEP皮瓣乳房重建术后腹部膨出的强化视野完全腹膜外修补术:病例报告
Surg Case Rep. 2024 Nov 11;10(1):259. doi: 10.1186/s40792-024-02056-9.
9
Conceptualizing Scaffold Guided Breast Tissue Regeneration in a Preclinical Large Animal Model.在临床前大型动物模型中对支架引导的乳腺组织再生进行概念化。
Bioengineering (Basel). 2024 Jun 10;11(6):593. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering11060593.
10
Is There a Difference in Abdominal Wall Muscle Strength, Endurance, and Motor Control Following Bilateral DIEP and TRAM Flaps for Breast Reconstruction?双侧腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣和横行腹直肌肌皮瓣乳房重建术后腹壁肌肉力量、耐力和运动控制是否存在差异?
Eplasty. 2024 May 23;24:e30. eCollection 2024.