Eisenhardt Steffen U, Momeni Arash, von Fritschen Uwe, Horch Raymund E, Stark G Björn, Bannasch Holger, Harder Yves, Heitmann Christoph, Kremer Thomas, Rieger Ulrich M, Kneser Ulrich
Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Klinik für Plastische und Handchirurgie.
Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.
Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2018 Aug;50(4):248-255. doi: 10.1055/a-0631-9025. Epub 2018 Aug 21.
The most common donor-site for autologous breast reconstruction is the abdomen. Over the past several decades technical advances have resulted in the development of flaps that have been associated with a progressive decrease in abdominal wall morbidity. However, controversy exists related to the differences between muscle-sparing (MS)-TRAM and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. Hence, the question which approach should be considered standard of care remains unanswered. To address this question the current literature and published evidence was critically reviewed and discussed by an expert panel at the 39th Annual Meeting of the German-speaking Society for Micro surgery of the Peripheral Nerves and Vessels (DAM). Based on this discussion a consensus statement was developed that incorporates contemporary data regarding postoperative complication rate, donor site morbidity, as well as expert opinion regarding technical details in autologous breast reconstruction with free TRAM and DIEP flaps.
自体乳房重建最常见的供区是腹部。在过去几十年中，技术进步促使皮瓣得到发展，腹壁发病率也随之逐步降低。然而，保留肌肉（MS）的横行腹直肌肌皮瓣（TRAM）与腹壁下深动脉穿支皮瓣（DIEP）之间的差异仍存在争议。因此，哪种方法应被视为标准治疗方案这一问题仍未得到解答。为解决这一问题，一个专家小组在德语区周围神经和血管显微外科学会（DAM）第39届年会上对当前文献和已发表的证据进行了严格审查和讨论。基于此次讨论，制定了一份共识声明，其中纳入了关于术后并发症发生率、供区发病率的当代数据，以及关于游离TRAM皮瓣和DIEP皮瓣自体乳房重建技术细节的专家意见。
