Oversized lotus petal flap for reconstruction of extensive perineal defects following abdomino perineal resection.

INTRODUCTION: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) of low rectal and anal tumors are performed for optimal oncological outcome but results in large defects in the perineum. Although vertical rectus abdominus (VRAM) flap is commonly employed for extensive perineal reconstruction, donor site morbidity remains problematic. The fascio-cutaneous "lotus petal" flap is an appealing option for reconstructing perineal defects as it may benefit from less donor site morbidity than other techniques. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that the lotus flap should not only be limited to small and moderate sized defects, but can also be applied to extensive APR. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on the outcomes and dimensions of the lotus flap was performed. Articles with clear anatomical landmarks and internal pudendal artery flaps dimensions were identified. Afterwards, the lotus flap technique was applied on a series of patients with extensive perineal defects following APR treated in our center. RESULTS: Four articles on internal pudendal artery perforator flap were selected. The average reported size of this flap was 13cm×6cm. In our center, reconstruction of the perineum with oversized lotus flaps was performed on 10 consecutive patients. None had partial/complete flap loss or donor-site morbidity. The use of a Jack-Knife surgical position, indocyanide green fluorescence imaging, and preservation of a proximal skin bridge can extend the size of a secure flap to up to 20cm in length. CONCLUSION: The oversized lotus flap is a reliable option for reconstruction after extensive APR.

Partial DIEP flap loss in a patient with history of abdominal liposuction.

Classically, history of prior abdominal liposuction has been considered a relative contraindication for breast reconstruction using deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. The rationale for this is based on the fact that liposuction can possibly damage perforating vessels, which could compromise flap survival. However, multiple recently published reports have shown that imaging using CT angiography or colour Duplex ultrasonography could be used to accurately assess the adequacy of the perforating vessels before DIEP flap harvest. This contraindication is currently being reconsidered in the scientific literature. We present a case of partial DIEP flap loss in a patient with history of abdominal liposuction that happened despite preoperative identification of adequate perforators using CT angiography and intraoperative clear evidence of patent anastomoses. This occurrence reopens in our view the question of whether DIEP flaps can be safely performed on patients with a history of abdominal liposuction, even in the presence of adequate perforators on regular CT angiography or Doppler ultrasonography. While abdominal liposuction may not injure perforating vessels, its detrimental effect on linking micro-vessels within the flap cannot be fully evaluated using CT Angiography. Therefore, the use of another imaging modality, such as the indocyanine green laser angiography, to assess perfusion before DIEP flap harvesting is performed and could be considered in patients with history of abdominal liposuction.