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
. 2025 Sep;41(7):631-640.
doi: 10.1055/a-2483-5472. Epub 2024 Nov 25.

Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap with Implant Placement has a Favorable Complication Profile Compared with Implant-Only or Flap-Only Reconstruction

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap with Implant Placement has a Favorable Complication Profile Compared with Implant-Only or Flap-Only Reconstruction

Carol Wang et al. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2025 Sep.

Abstract

Hybrid deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap and simultaneous silicone implant breast reconstruction procedures ("DIEP + I") have many conceptual advantages compared with either reconstruction method alone, but the outcomes of DIEP + I reconstruction have not yet been well studied. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of DIEP + I with implant-only and DIEP-only reconstruction.A retrospective review was conducted of patients undergoing DIEP + I, implant-only, and DIEP-only breast reconstruction from 2019 to 2023 at a single institution. Demographics and complication rates were compared between groups.A total of 145 patients were included in the DIEP + I (N = 26), implant-only (N = 59), and DIEP-only (N = 60) groups. The DIEP + I group had a lower overall complication rate than implant-only reconstruction (18.4 vs. 41.1%, p = 0.014), which was primarily due to the lower incidence of infections in the DIEP + I group (2.6 vs. 22.2%, p = 0.006). Accordingly, DIEP + I reconstruction decreased the odds of infection by 90% (OR = 0.095, p = 0.024) compared with implant-only reconstruction. The DIEP + I group had similar rates of wound healing and implant-related complications compared with the implant-only and DIEP-only groups, and no patients in the DIEP + I group experienced flap loss.DIEP + I breast reconstruction had a lower rate of infectious complications than implant-only reconstruction, and no higher rate of flap compromise or wound healing complications. This technique could be considered as a means of minimizing infection risk in patients with other risk factors who are seeking implant-based reconstruction, and of enhancing breast projection in patients who are seeking DIEP flap reconstruction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Similar articles

Publication types

MeSH terms