Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2019 Sep;144(3):369e-377e.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005906.

Comparative Analysis of Single versus Stacked Free Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Center Experience

Nicholas T Haddock  1 , Min-Jeong Cho  1 , Sumeet S Teotia  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparative Analysis of Single versus Stacked Free Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Center Experience

Nicholas T Haddock et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Sep.

Abstract

Background: As breast reconstructive microsurgeons increase their available flap techniques with experience, the need for stacked and multiple flaps may generate an improved aesthetic outcome. The authors present their institutional experience of using single versus stacked free flap breast reconstruction.

Methods: ONE THOUSAND SEVENTY: flaps were performed on 509 patients from 2010 to 2018 by two senior surgeons at a single university hospital. Three hundred eighty-eight flaps were either stacked profunda artery perforator (PAP) flaps, four-flap flaps [bilateral PAP plus bilateral deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap], or double-pedicle DIEP/superficial inferior epigastric perforator flaps. Six hundred eighty-two flaps were either unilateral or bilateral DIEP or PAP flap (one flap per breast). Demographics, patient comorbidities, and flap complications were compared between the two groups.

Results: Of the 509 patients, 359 underwent single DIEP or PAP flap (one flap per breast) and 150 patients underwent stacked free flaps. The stacked flap group had statistically lower body mass index, higher rates of radiation therapy, longer procedure time, smaller flaps, higher deep venous thrombosis rates, and higher take-back rates compared with the single flap group. There were no statistical differences in the rates of flap loss (2.2 percent in stacked flaps versus 1.1 percent in single flaps), wound complication, hematoma, or pulmonary embolism.

Conclusions: Autologous breast reconstruction is the gold standard for natural and durable breast reconstruction, often giving superior aesthetic outcomes and higher patient satisfaction. However, the true success of autologous breast reconstruction is limited to the amount of tissue available to provide total breast reconstruction. This study shows that stacked flap breast reconstruction is safe and has similar complication rates as single-flap breast reconstruction.

Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Losken A, Pinell XA, Sikoro K, Yezhelyev MV, Anderson E, Carlson GW. Autologous fat grafting in secondary breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;66:518–522.
    1. Spear SL, Wilson HB, Lockwood MD. Fat injection to correct contour deformities in the reconstructed breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;116:1300–1305.
    1. Rozen WM, Patel NG, Ramakrishnan VV. Increasing options in autologous microsurgical breast reconstruction: Four free flaps for ‘stacked’ bilateral breast reconstruction. Gland Surg. 2016;5:255–260.
    1. Hamdi M, Khuthaila DK, Van Landuyt K, Roche N, Monstrey S. Double-pedicle abdominal perforator free flaps for unilateral breast reconstruction: New horizons in microsurgical tissue transfer to the breast. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60:904–912; discussion 913–914.
    1. Blechman KM, Broer PN, Tanna N, Ireton JE, Ahn CY, Allen RJ. Stacked profunda artery perforator flaps for unilateral breast reconstruction: A case report. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2013;29:631–634.

Publication types

MeSH terms