Validation of the triangular prism method using computed tomography to estimate DIEP flap weight in routine clinical practice – a St Andrew free flap audit registry study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/jphs.v60.44801Keywords:
DIEP flap, breast reconstruction, flap weight estimation, computed tomography, preoperative planning, microsurgeryAbstract
Introduction: An accurate preoperative estimation of deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps in breast reconstruction facilitates planning. Different methods have been proposed, but few methods have been validated for the degree of agreement with harvested volume, and none have been validated in a more significant cohort. This article aimed to validate the triangular prism method using computed tomography (CT) to estimate DIEP weight in routine clinical practice.
Methods: The triangular prism method, previously described by Nanidis, Ridha, and Jallali, uses CT to estimate DIEP flap weight, used in clinical practice in the department, was evaluated. The study included 1 year of consecutive patients, and data were extracted from the department’s free flap audit registry. Bland Altman plots with mean bias and limits of agreement (LOA) with confidence intervals were drawn to estimate agreement between the estimated and actual flap weight.
Results and conclusions: A total of 164 DIEPs were recorded, and complete data were available for 119 DIEPs (73%). The mean estimated flap weight was 979 g (range: 251–2,125, SD [standard deviation] 448), and the actual flap weight was 937 g (range: 303–2,792, SD 461). The Bland-Altman plot showed that the estimated weight overestimated the actual weight by an average of 41 grams. However, the LOAs of –530 and 614 grams far exceed the a priori set limits of maximum acceptable difference (100 grams) between the estimated and the actual flap weight. Further studies are needed regarding how the triangular prism method can be combined with clinical measurements to become an easily used and reliable tool.
Downloads
References
Patel NG, Rozen WM, Chow WT, et al. Stacked and bipedicled abdominal free flaps for breast reconstruction: Considerations for shaping. Gland Surg. 2016;5(2):115–121. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2227-684x.2016.02.03
Lee KT, Mun GH. Volumetric planning using computed tomographic angiography improves clinical outcomes in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(5):771e–780e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000002045 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000002045
Roggio T, Pantelides NM, Morgan M, et al. Stacked TUG and DIEP flaps to reconstruct a single breast: Expanding the scope of autologous breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2022;75(9):2974–2981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2022.06.039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2022.06.039
Tanna N, Barnett SL, Robinson EL, et al. Hybrid microsurgical breast reconstruction: HyFIL(R) & HyPAD techniques. Clin Plast Surg. 2023;50(2):337–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2022.10.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2022.10.006
Mohanna PN, Farhadi J. A method of preoperatively assessing the volume of abdominal tissue available for an autologous breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129(4):756e–757e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318245e8b4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318245e8b4
Woo KJ, Mun GH. Estimation of DIEP flap weight for breast reconstruction by the pinch test. Microsurgery. 2017;37(7):786–792. https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.30217 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.30217
Minn KW, Hong KY, Lee SW. Preoperative TRAM free flap volume estimation for breast reconstruction in lean patients. Ann Plast Surg. 2010;64(4):397–401. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181b143ef DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181b143ef
Rosson GD, Shridharani SM, Magarakis M, et al. Three-dimensional computed tomographic angiography to predict weight and volume of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap for breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2011;31(7):510–516. https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.20910 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.20910
Eder M, Raith S, Jalali J, et al. Three-dimensional prediction of free-flap volume in autologous breast reconstruction by CT angiography imaging. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2014;9(4):541–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-013-0941-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-013-0941-4
Nanidis TG, Ridha H, Jallali N. The use of computed tomography for the estimation of DIEP flap weights in breast reconstruction: A simple mathematical formula. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(10):1352–1356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.05.049 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.05.049
Kato S, Mori H, Koga H, et al. The triangular prism approximation method for volume estimation of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap in breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2023;43(2):125–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.30972 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.30972
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8
Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8(2):135–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029900800204 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/096228099673819272
Lu MJ, Zhong WH, Liu YX, et al. Sample size for assessing agreement between two methods of measurement by Bland-Altman method. Int J Biostat. 2016;12(2):20150039. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijb-2015-0039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijb-2015-0039
Ranganathan P, Pramesh CS, Aggarwal R. Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: Measures of agreement. Perspect Clin Res. 2017;8(4):187–191. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_123_17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_123_17
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Emma Hansson, Venkat Ramakrishnan, Olivia Sharp, Thaj Rehman, Mary Morgan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica Society owns the copyright for all material published until Volume 57 (2023) unless otherwise specified. As from 2024 all published articles, unless otherwise specified, are published under CC-BY licences, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, with the condition of proper attribution to the original work.
