Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Complications of Unipedicled TRAM Flap Reconstruction: Treatment and Prevention (and Their Influence on the Choice of the Reconstruction)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery

Abstract

Breast reconstruction with a unipedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap, originally developed by Carl Hartrampf, is a breast reconstruction procedure that is widely used because it allows a final reconstruction without a prosthesis with a natural result and is stable over time. There are two specific complications: skin fatty tissue necrosis and parietal complications such as hernias or bulges, for which there are measures to take and adapted treatments. To reduce the risk of necrosis, the bipedicled TRAM flap and the TRAM flap with strengthening of the vasculature by microsurgical techniques (supercharged TRAM flap and free TRAM flap) have been proposed. To reduce parietal complications , microsurgical techniques with preservation of the rectus abdominis muscle (deep inferior epigastric perforator flap and superficial inferior epigastric artery flap) have appeared. In our experience of the unipedicled TRAM flap, careful selection of patients, a delayed procedure, and meticulous repair of the abdominal wall are preventive measures for these complications. As a result, the rate of complications has been significantly reduced, strengthening the indication for the unipedicled TRAM flap compared with other TRAM flap techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hartrampf CR Jr, Scheflan M, Black PW (1982) Breast reconstruction with a transverse abdominal island flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 69:216–225

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Grotting JC, Urist MM, Maddox WA et al (1989) Conventional TRAM flap versus free microsurgical TRAM flap for immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 83:828–839

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Schusterman MA, Kroll SS, Miller MJ et al (1994) The free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap for breast reconstruction: one center’s experience with 211 consecutive cases. Ann Plast Surg 32:234–241

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Blondeel PN (1999) One hundred free DIEP flap breast reconstructions: a personal experience. Br J Plast Surg 52:104–111

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chevray PM (2004) Breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery flaps: a prospective comparison with TRAM and DIEP flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 114:1077–1083

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Clough K, O’Donoghue J, Fitoussi A et al (2001) Prospective evaluation of late cosmetic results following breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:1710–1716

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones G (2007) The pedicled TRAM Flap in breast reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 34:83–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Granzowa JW, Levineb JL, Chiub ES, Allen RJ (2006) Breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap: history and an update on current technique. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 59:571–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Caplin DA, Nathan CR, Couper SG (2000) Salvage of TRAM flaps with compromised venous outflow. Plast Reconstr Surg 106:400–401

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Olsson E, Höijer P (2005) Activated protein C resistance due to factor V Leiden, elevated coagulation factor VIII and postoperative deep vein thrombosis in late breast reconstruction with a free TRAM flap: a report of two cases. Br J Plast Surg 58:720–723

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kroll SS, Gherardini G, Martin JE et al (1998) Flap necroses in free and pedicled TRAM flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 102:1502–1507

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Garvey PB, Buchel EW et al (2006) DIEP and pedicled TRAM flaps: a comparison of outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:1711–1719

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kroll SS (2000) Fat necrosis in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous and deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 106:576–583

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bozikov K, Arnez T, Hertl K et al (2009) Fat necrosis in free DIEP flaps: incidence, risk, and predictor factors. Ann Plast Surg 63:138–142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Petit JY, Rietgens M, Garusi C et al (2003) Abdominal complications with pedicled TRAM flap: is there still an indication for pedicled TRAM in the year 2003? Plast Reconstr Surg 112:1063–1065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ascherman JA, Seruya M et al (2008) Abdominal wall morbidity following unilateral and bilateral breast reconstruction with pedicled TRAM flaps: an outcome analysis of 117 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Man LX, Selber JC, Serletti JM (2009) Abdominal wall following free TRAM or DIEP flap reconstruction: a meta-analysis and critical review. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:752–764

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bhat W, Akhtar S, Akali A (2010) Pregnancy in the early stages following DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a review and case report. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 63:782–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Padubidri AN, Yetman R, Browne E et al (2001) Complications of postmastectomy breast reconstructions in smokers, ex-smokers, and nonsmokers. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:342–349

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Spear SL, Ducic I, Cuoco F, Taylor N (2007) Effect of obesity on flap and donor-site complications in pedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:788–795

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Wallace AM, Evans GRD, Goldberg DP et al (1996) Unexpected vascular compromise in transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap reconstruction. A report of two patients. Ann Plat Surg 36:246–250

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Codner MA, Bostwick J, Nahai F et al (1995) TRAM flap vascular delay for high risk breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 96:1615–1622

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Taylor GI, Corlett RJ, Caddy CM, Zelt RG (1992) An anatomic review of the delay phenomenon: II. Clinical applications. Plast Reconstr Surg 89:408–417

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Holm C, Mayr M, Hofter E, Ninkovic M (2006) Perfusion zones of the DIEP flap revisited: a clinical study. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:37–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Taylor GI (1999) The delayed TRAM flap for breast reconstruction: why, when, and how? Operat Techn Plast Reconstr Surg 6:74–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. O’Shaugnessy K, Mustoe T (2008) The surgical TRAM flap delay: reliability of zone III using a simplified technique under local anesthesia. Plast Reconstr Surg 122:1627–1633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Spear SL, Wilson HB, Lockwood MD (2005) Fat injection to correct contour deformities in the reconstructed breast. Plast Reconstr Surg 116(5):1300–1305

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Restifo RJ, Ward BA, Scoutt LM, Brown JM, Taylor KJW (1997) Timing, magnitude, and utility of surgical delay in the TRAM flap: II. Clinical studies. Plast Reconstr Surg 99:1217–1223

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Restifo RJ, Ahmed SS, Rosser J et al (1998) TRAM flap perforator ligation and the delay phenomenon: development of an endoscopic/laparoscopic delay procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 101:1503–1511

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut du Sein de l’Orangerie, Strasbourg, France

    Jean-Marc Piat

Authors
  1. Jean-Marc Piat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Marc Piat .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , BreastUnit, Hospital Nossa Senhora das Gracas, Rua Padre Agostinho 913 ap 51, Curitiba, 80430050, Brazil

    Cicero Urban

  2. , Plastic and Reconstructive Division, European Institute of Oncology, Via Ripamonti, 435, Milan, 20100, Italy

    Mario Rietjens

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Piat, JM. (2013). Complications of Unipedicled TRAM Flap Reconstruction: Treatment and Prevention (and Their Influence on the Choice of the Reconstruction). In: Urban, C., Rietjens, M. (eds) Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2652-0_35

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2652-0_35

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-2651-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-2652-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation