Perforator Flaps The History of Evolution


   Handchirurgie Mikrochirurgie Plastische Chirurgie | June 2002 | Vol. 4 | Num. 34

Robert J. Allen, MD 

C. Heitmann, MD

Abstract

This article reviews the recent evolution of perforator flaps. The tie between perforator flaps and skin flaps as well as perforator flaps and musculocutaneous flaps is explained. The paraumbilical perforator flap, the deep inferior epigastric artery flap (DIEP flap), the gluteal artery perforator Hap (GAP flap) and various perforator flaps and perforator-based flaps are described in combination with the review of the relevant literature. As a prospect into the future, the technique of "supra-microsurgery is presented.


Fig. 1 Drawing of the donor site of the gluteal artery perforator (GAP) flap with the course of the superior gluteal artery and the gluteus maximus muscle (from Allen and Tucker 19952, with permission).


Fig. 2 Drawing of the GAP flap harvest in which the perforator vessels are followed through the muscle to the superior gluteal artery to gain pedicle length (from Allen and Tucker 19952, with permission).


Fig. 3 Drawing after inset of the GAP-flap with microanastomoses to the internal mammary vessels (from Allen and Tucker 19952, with permission).

The History of Evolution
Something new.. is something old that has been forgotten. With this ancient Russian proverb in mind we start this article on the recent evolution of perforator flaps with the work of Stuart Milton in the 1960's (New Orleans, LA and Oxford, England). At that time wound closure relied heavily on skin flaps. An established principle was that the length of the skin flaps was not supposed to be greater than 1.5xthe width. It was Stuart Milton who challenged this concept in his classic investigations on porcine skin flaps. Milton demonstrated that the surviving length of skin flaps is not directly proportional to the flap width,but that long, narrow skin flaps can be raised with safety as long as they are based on a known vessel. Thus, axial pattern skin flaps such as the groin flap and the whole concept of cutaneous vascular territories became popular. In the following years, however, these ideas were no longer pursued because muscle flaps gained momentum in reconstructive Plastic surgery. Rapidly the whole body was screened for possible muscle and musculocutaneous flaps. And with the advent of the operative microscope, the various free muscle or musculocutaneous flap transfers soon offered a solution to practically every reconstructive problem. Later on, surgeons focused on two points: Reducing the donor site morbidity and reducing unnecessary bulk. This led to debulking procedures and to the concept of muscle sparing techniques as represented by the split latissimus and partial rectus abdominis muscle transfer.

A fresh and different approach to address donor-site morbidity and unsightly bulk was initiated by Koshima and Soeda. Koshima utilized the skin territory of the rectus abdommis muscle to reconstruct the floor of the mouth and the groin with free skin flaps. These flaps were based on a single paraumbilical perforator vessel from the deep inferior epigastric artery. Technically, the perforator vessels were followed towards the deep inferior epigastric vessels and dissected from the rectus abdominis muscle to gain pedicle length. The resulting flap was thin, consisted only of skin and the vascular pedicle and left behind an intact rectus abdominis muscle.

Independently, Allen and Treece and Allen and Tucker followed the same principles and transformed the transverse rectus abdominis flap and the superior gluteus maximus flap into the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap and gluteal artery perforator (GAP) flap for breast reconstruction (Figs. 1 to 3). At the same time, Angrigiani et aldeveloped the thoracodorsal artery perforator (TAP) flap and thus the concept of perforator flaps was established. This concept shifts the focus in standard myocutaneous flaps towards the vascular pedicle that leads to a known skin territory. In the TAP flap, DIEP flap, and GAP flap it could be demonstrated that the muscle component was not mandatory for the survival of the dependent skin territories and the attempt was justified to spare the muscle and simply harvest the skin component with the musculocutaneous perforator vessels and the main vascular pedicle. The authors of this article believe that perforator flaps close the circle to Stuart Milton, because with perforator flaps it is again just skin flaps with a known vascular supply.

The work of Allen, Koshima, and Angrigiani was joined by Blondeel, Blondeel, Feller and Galla and Webster. Annual international courses focusing on perforator flaps are held with alternating hosts since 1997 and a vast number of perforator flaps was developed (Table 1). This broad variety of perforator flaps caused confusion in the literature about the correct nomenclature concerning perforator flaps. Weit et al defined a true perforator flap as a skin flap that is nourished by musculocutaneous perforator vessels. Therefore, the radial artery perforator flap and the anterior thigh flap that derive from septocutaneous perforator vessels would be no true perforator flaps. However, both these flapsrepresent skin flaps with a known axial vessel as a pedicle and both flaps are harvested according to the principle that perforator vessels are followed to their main vascular source. Therefore, the authors of this article would like others suggest the term perforator-based flap to address that kind of flap.

The future direction of perforator flaps might be represented by Koshima's supra-microsurgery. Koshima developed the technique, the equipment, and the skills to perform microvascular anastomoses of vessels with a kaliber of 0.5 mm. This allows Koshima to raise for example the paraumbilical flap just to the level of the perforator vessel. A further dissection to the deep inferior epigastric artery is no longer necessary. This would theoretically enable us to raise free skin flaps wherever a perforator vessel can be picked up by the Doppler and create "freestyle free flaps without concern about anatomic variation, resulting in absolute freedom in flap choice.

References

  1. Allen RJ, Treece P: Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 32: 32-38
  2. Allen RI, Tucker C: Superior gluteal artery perforator free flap for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 95: 1207- 1212
  3. Angrigiani C, Grilli D, Siebert I: Latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap without muscle. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 96: 1608 2614
  4. Ao M, Mae 0, Namba Y, Asagoe l(: Perforator-based flap for coverage of lumbosacral defects. Plast Reconst Surg 1998; 101: 987 -991
  5. Blondeel N, Vanderstraeten GG, Monstrey SJ, Van Landuyt l(, Tonnard P, Lysens R, Boeckx WD, Matton C: The donor site morbidity of free DIEP flaps and free TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction. Br j Plast Surg 1997; 50: 322-330
  6. Blondeel PN: The sensate free superior gluteal artery perforator (5- GAP) flap: A valuable alternative in autologous breast reconstruction. BrJ Plast Surg 1999; 52: 185293
  7. Cavadas PC, Sanz Giminez Rico JR. Gutierrez de Ia Camera A, NavarroMonzonis A, Soler-Nomdedeu 5, Martinez-Soriano F: The medial sural artery perforator free flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108: 16092615
  8. Deiler 5, Pfadenhauer A, Widmann J, Stutzle H, l(anz KG, Stock W: Tensor fasciae latae perforator flap for reconstruction of composite Achilles tendon defects with skin and vascularized fascia. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 106: 342-349
  9. El-Khatib HA: Island fasciocutaneous flap based on the proximal perforators of the radial artery for resurfacing of burned cubital fossa. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 100: 919-925
  10. Elliott LF, Raffel B, Wade]: Segmental latissimus dorsi free flap: clinical applications. Ann Plast Surg 1989; 23: 231 -238
  11. Feller A-M: Free TRAM. Results and abdominal wall function. Clin Plast Surg 1994; 21: 223-232
  12. Feller A-M, Galla Ti: The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap. Clin Plast Surg 1998; 25: 197-206
  13. Giunta R, Geisweid A: Defining perforator flaps: what is really perforated? Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109:14602461
  14. Hallock CC: Defatting of flaps by means of suction-assisted lipectomy. PlastReconstrSurg 1985; 76: 948-952
  15. Hamdi M, Weiler-Mithoff EM, Webster MH: Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap in breast reconstruction: experience with the first 50 flaps. PlastReconstrSurg 1999:103:86-95
  16. Higgins IF, Orlando GS, Blondeel PN: Ischial pressure sore reconstruction using an inferior gluteal artery perforator (IGAP) flap. Br] Plast Surg 2002: 55: 83-85
  17. Holmstrom U. Lossing C: Lateral thoracodorsal flap: an intercostal perforator flap for breast reconstruction. Semin Plast Surg 2002; 16:53-59
  18. Jacobson JH, Miller DB, Suarez E: Microvascular surgery: A new horizon in coronary artery surgery. Circulation 1960; 22: 767
  19. long SF, Wei FC: The distally based forearm island flap in hand reconstruction. Plast ReconstrSurg 1998; 102: 400-406
  20. Koshima I. Soeda 5: Inferior epigastric artery skin flaps without rectus abdominis muscle. Br] Plast Surg 1989; 42: 645-648
  21. Koshima I, Soeda 5: Free posterior tibial perforator-based flaps. Ann Plast Surg 1991; 26: 284-288
  22. Koshima I, Urushibara K, Inagawa K, Hamasaki I, Moriguchi I: Free medial plantar perforator flaps for resurfacing of finger and foot defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 107: 17532758
  23. Koshima I, Nanba Y, Takahashi Y, Tsukino A, Kishimoto K: Future of supramicrosurgery as it relates to breast reconstruction: free paraumbilical perforator adiposal llap. Semin Plast Surg 2002; 16: 93-99
  24. McGregor IA, Jackson IT: The groin flap. Br] Plast Surg 1972; 25: 3- 16
  25. Milton SH: Pedicled skin flaps: the fallacy of the length: width ratio. Br] Surg 1970; 57: 502-508
  26. Milton SH: Experimental studies on island flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg1971; 48: 574-578
  27. Safak T, Akyuerek M: Free transfer of the radial forearm flap with preservation of the radial artery. Ann Plast Surg 2000; 45: 97-99
  28. Wei FC, lain V, Suominen 5, Chen HC: Confusion among perforator flaps: What is a true perforator flap? Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 107:874- 876
  29. Wei FC,]ain V, Colic N, Chen H, Chuang DCC, Lin CH: Have we found an ideal soft tissue flap? An experience with 672 anterolateral thigh flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109: 2219-2230



Our Social Networks

Call Today

1 (888) 890-3437

©2016 The Center for Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction.
ALL Rights Reserved