Atlas of recipient vessels for the superficial venous system of DIEP-flaps – a systematic literature review and clinical practice review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/jphs.v61.45988Keywords:
Microsurgery, breast reconstruction, DIEP flap, venous supercharging, superficial inferior epigastric veinAbstract
Background: Venous congestion contributes to up to 40% of failures in abdominally based free flaps, underscoring the importance of optimising superficial venous drainage in deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. The superficial inferior epigastric vein (SIEV) is sometimes essential to flap outflow. This systematic review investigates the choice of recipient vessels for superficial venous supercharging.
Methods: A systematic review was performed according to a PROSPERO-registered protocol (CRD42022353591) and PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies describing SIEV recipient vessels or vessel-selection algorithms. Extracted data included study design, recipient vessel, graft use, and decision strategies. A clinical practice review was also conducted at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, where prophylactic SIEV–cephalic vein (CV) anastomosis has been used for over two decades.
Results: Twenty-nine studies were included. Reported recipient vessels outside the flap comprised, for example, the following veins: internal mammary, cephalic, thoracoacromial, and thoracodorsal. Intra-flap options included anastomoses to branches or the caudal end of the deep inferior epigastric vein. Three studies described interposition grafts, and eight proposed selection algorithms, with no consensus. The internal mammary vein was most frequently used. At Sahlgrenska, a short axillary-fold incision provides consistent and cosmetically favourable access to the CV, adding minimal operative time.
Conclusion: Recipient vessel selection for SIEV anastomosis remains highly variable in the literature. Long-term institutional experience supports the CV as a reliable and versatile option. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate outcomes.
Downloads
References
Nahabedian MY, Momen B, Manson PN. Factors associated with anastomotic failure after microvascular reconstruction of the breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114(1):74–82.
Blondeel PN, Arnstein M, Verstraete K, et al. Venous congestion and blood flow in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous and deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106(6):1295–1299.
Boyd JB, Taylor GI, Corlett R. The vascular territories of the superior epigastric and the deep inferior epigastric systems. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1984;73(1):1–16.
Carramenha e Costa MA, Carriquiry C, Vasconez LO, et al. An anatomic study of the venous drainage of the transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987;79(2):208–217.
Sowa Y, Kodama T, Fujikawa K, et al. The influence of venous system patterns on DIEP flap viability for breast reconstruction. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2021;55(6):361–367.
Frank K, Strobel A, Ludolph I, et al. Improving the safety of DIEP flap transplantation: detailed perforator anatomy study using preoperative CTA. J Pers Med. 2022;12(5):701.
Davis CR, Jones L, Tillett RL, et al. Predicting venous congestion before DIEP breast reconstruction by identifying atypical venous connections on preoperative CTA imaging. Microsurgery. 2019;39(1):24–31.
Kurlander DE, Brown MS, Iglesias RA, et al. Mapping the superficial inferior epigastric system and its connection to the deep system: an MRA analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016;69(2):221–226.
Katz RD, Manahan MA, Rad AN, et al. Classification schema for anatomic variations of the inferior epigastric vasculature evaluated by abdominal CT angiograms for breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2010;30(8):593–602.
Schaverien M, Saint-Cyr M, Arbique G, et al. Arterial and venous anatomies of the deep inferior epigastric perforator and superficial inferior epigastric artery flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(6):1909–1919.
Kim SY, Lee KT, Mun GH. The influence of a pfannenstiel scar on venous anatomy of the lower abdominal wall and implications for deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139(3):540–548.
Rozen WM, Garcia-Tutor E, Alonso-Burgos A, et al. The effect of anterior abdominal wall scars on the vascular anatomy of the abdominal wall: a cadaveric and clinical study with clinical implications. Clin Anat. 2009;22(7):815–822.
Hansson E, Ramakrishnan V, Morgan M. A systematic review of the scientific evidence of venous supercharging in autologous breast reconstruction with abdominally based flaps. World J Surg Oncol. 2023;21(1):379.
Ayestaray B, Yonekura K, Motomura H, et al. A comparative study between deep inferior epigastric artery perforator and thoracoacromial venous supercharged deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(1):78–82.
Vijayasekaran A, Mohan AT, Zhu L, et al. Anastomosis of the superficial inferior epigastric vein to the internal mammary vein to augment deep inferior artery perforator flaps. Clin Plast Surg. 2017;44(2):361–369.
Boutros SG. Double venous system drainage in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction: a single-surgeon experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131(4):671–676.
Figus A, Wade RG, Gorton L, et al. Venous perforators in DIEAP flaps: an observational anatomical study using duplex ultrasonography. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012;65(8):1051–1059.
Rozen WM, Chubb D, Ashton MW, et al. Images in plastic surgery: the anatomy of macrovascular arteriovenous shunts and implications for abdominal wall free flaps. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;67(2):99–100.
Rozen WM, Chubb D, Grinsell D, et al. The variability of the superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) and its angiosome: a clinical anatomical study. Microsurgery. 2010;30(5):386–391.
Gusenoff JA, Coon D, De La Cruz C, et al. Superficial inferior epigastric vessels in the massive weight loss population: implications for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(6):1621–1626.
Kita Y, Fukunaga Y, Arikawa M, et al. Anatomy of the arterial and venous systems of the superficial inferior epigastric artery flap: a retrospective study based on computed tomographic angiography. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2020;73(5):870–875.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.
Al-Dhamin A, Bissell MB, Prasad V, et al. The use of retrograde limb of internal mammary vein in autologous breast reconstruction with DIEAP flap: anatomical and clinical study. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72(3):281–284.
Ali R, Bernier C, Lin YT, et al. Surgical strategies to salvage the venous compromised deep inferior epigastric perforator flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2010;65(4):398–406.
Kubota Y, Mitsukawa N, Akita S, et al. Postoperative patency of the retrograde internal mammary vein anastomosis in free flap transfer. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(2):205–211.
Mackey SP, Ramsey KW. Exploring the myth of the valveless internal mammary vein – a cadaveric study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2011;64(9):1174–1179.
Mohebali J, Gottlieb LJ, Agarwal JP. Further validation for use of the retrograde limb of the internal mammary vein in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction using laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010;26(2):131–135.
Venturi ML, Poh MM, Chevray PM, et al. Comparison of flow rates in the antegrade and retrograde internal mammary vein for free flap breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2011;31(8):596–602.
Audolfsson T, Rozen WM, Wagstaff MJ, et al. A reliable and aesthetic technique for cephalic vein harvest in DIEP flap surgery. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2009;25(5):319–321.
Barnett GR, Carlisle IR, Gianoutsos MP. The cephalic vein: an aid in free TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Report of 12 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1996;97(1):71–76; discussion 7–8.
Silhol T, Suffee T, Hivelin M, et al. Déroutage de la veine céphalique dans la reconstruction mammaire par lambeaux libres: note technique [Transposition of the cephalic vein in free flap breast reconstruction: technical note]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet. 2018;63(1):75–80.
Villafane O, Gahankari D, Webster M. Superficial inferior epigastric vein (SIEV): ‘lifeboat’ for DIEP/TRAM flaps. Br J Plast Surg. 1999;52(7):599.
Guzzetti T, Thione A. The basilic vein: an alternative drainage of DIEP flap in severe venous congestion. Microsurgery. 2008;28(7):555–558.
Kim EJ, Lee HJ, Mun GH. Muscle-splitting approach to thoracoacromial vein for superdrainage in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2019;39(3):228–233.
Eom JS, Sun SH, Lee TJ. Selection of the recipient veins for additional anastomosis of the superficial inferior epigastric vein in breast reconstruction with free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous or deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;67(5):505–509.
Niranjan NS, Khandwala AR, Mackenzie DM. Venous augmentation of the free TRAM flap. Br J Plast Surg. 2001;54(4):335–337.
Wechselberger G, Schoeller T, Bauer T, et al. Venous superdrainage in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108(1):162–166.
Al Hindi A, Ozil C, Rem K, et al. Intraoperative superficial inferior epigastric vein preservation for venous compromise prevention in breast reconstruction by deep inferior epigastric perforator flap. Ann Chir Plast Esthet. 2019;64(3):245–250.
Xin Q, Luan J, Mu H, et al. Augmentation of venous drainage in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction: efficacy and advancement. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2012;28(5):313–318.
Sbitany H, Mirzabeigi MN, Kovach SJ, et al. Strategies for recognizing and managing intraoperative venous congestion in abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129(4):809–815.
Davies AJ, O’Neill JK, Wilson SM. The superficial outside-flap shunt (SOS) technique for free deep inferior epigastric perforator flap salvage. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(8):1094–1097.
Rohde C, Keller A. Novel technique for venous augmentation in a free deep inferior epigastric perforator flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;55(5):528–530.
Blondeel PN. One hundred free DIEP flap breast reconstructions: a personal experience. Br J Plast Surg. 1999;52(2):104–111.
Nigam M, DeFazio MV, Nahabedian MY. Interpositional lateral thoracic vein graft for DIEP flap salvage in setting of superficial venous system dominance. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5(5):e1322.
Bartlett EL, Zavlin D, Menn ZK, et al. Algorithmic approach for intraoperative salvage of venous congestion in DIEP flaps. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2018;34(6):404–412.
Galanis C, Nguyen P, Koh J, et al. Microvascular lifeboats: a stepwise approach to intraoperative venous congestion in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134(1):20–27.
La Padula S, Hersant B, Noel W, et al. Use of the retrograde limb of the internal mammary vein to avoid venous congestion in DIEP flap breast reconstruction: further evidences of a reliable and time-sparing procedure. Microsurgery. 2016;36(6):447–452.
Pignatti M, Pinto V, Giorgini FA, et al. Different hydraulic constructs to optimize the venous drainage of DIEP flaps in breast reconstruction: decisional algorithm and review of the literature. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2021;37(3):216–226.
Tokumoto H, Akita S, Arai M, et al. A method using the cephalic vein for superdrainage in breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2019;39(6):502–508.
Holmstrom H. The free abdominoplasty flap and its use in breast reconstruction. An experimental study and clinical case report. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1979;13(3):423–427.
Elander A, Lundberg J, Karlsson P, et al. Indikation för bröstrekonstruktion med kroppsegen vävnad med fri lambå. Stockholm; Nationella medicinska indikationer: Staten, kommuner och landsting (SKL);2011.
Brorson F, Elander A, Thorarinsson A, et al. Patient reported outcome and quality of life after delayed breast reconstruction – an RCT comparing different reconstructive methods in radiated and non-radiated patients. Clin Breast Cancer. 2022;22(8):753–761.
Brorson F, Thorarinsson A, Kolby L, et al. Early complications in delayed breast reconstruction: a prospective, randomized study comparing different reconstructive methods in radiated and non-radiated patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020;46(12):2208–2217.
Lofstrand J, Paganini A, Grimby-Ekman A, et al. Long-term patient-reported back and shoulder function after delayed breast reconstruction with a latissimus dorsi flap: case-control cohort study. Br J Surg. 2024;111(1):znad296.
Lofstrand J, Paganini A, Liden M, et al. Donor-site satisfaction of DIEP and latissimus dorsi flaps – a comparative cohort study. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2023;39(6):472–481.
Löfstrand J, Paganini A, Lidén M, et al. Comparison of patient-reported achievements of goals and core outcomes with delayed breast reconstruction in irradiated patients: latissimus dorsi with an implant versus DIEP. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2023;58:74–81.
Lundberg J, Thorarinsson A, Karlsson P, et al. When is the deep inferior epigastric artery flap indicated for breast reconstruction in patients not treated with radiotherapy? Ann Plast Surg. 2014;73(1):105–113.
Thorarinsson A, Frojd V, Kolby L, et al. A retrospective review of the incidence of various complications in different delayed breast reconstruction methods. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2016;50(1):25–34.
Thorarinsson A, Frojd V, Kolby L, et al. Patient determinants as independent risk factors for postoperative complications of breast reconstruction. Gland Surg. 2017;6(4):355–367.
Thorarinsson A, Frojd V, Kolby L, et al. Long-term health-related quality of life after breast reconstruction: comparing 4 different methods of reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5(6):e1316.
Thorarinsson A, Frojd V, Kolby L, et al. Blood loss and duration of surgery are independent risk factors for complications after breast reconstruction. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017;51(5):352–357.
Hansson E, Lofstrand J, Larsson C, et al. Gothenburg breast reconstruction (GoBreast) II protocol: a Swedish partially randomised patient preference, superiority trial comparing autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction. BMJ Open. 2024;14(7):e084025.
Lundberg J, Mark H. Avoidance of complications after the use of deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps for reconstruction of the breast. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2006;40(2):79–81.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Emma Hansson, Jonas Löfstrand
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.
