TY - JOUR
T1 - Evidence-based clinical practice guideline
T2 - Autologous breast reconstruction with DIEP or pedicled TRAM abdominal flaps
AU - Lee, Bernard T.
AU - Agarwal, Jayant P.
AU - Ascherman, Jeffrey A.
AU - Caterson, Stephanie A.
AU - Gray, Diedra D.
AU - Hollenbeck, Scott T.
AU - Khan, Seema A.
AU - Loeding, Lauren D.
AU - Mahabir, Raman C.
AU - Miller, Archibald S.
AU - Perdikis, Galen
AU - Schwartz, Jaime S.
AU - Sieling, Beth A.
AU - Thoma, Achilles
AU - Wolfman, Judith A.
AU - Wright, Jean L.
N1 - Funding Information:
funded exclusively by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons; no outside commercial funding was received to support the development of this article. All contributors and preparers of the guideline, including ASPS staff and consultants, disclosed all relevant conflicts of interest via an online disclosure reporting database. In accordance with the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations for guideline development, members with a conflict of interest represented less than half of the guideline Work Group. Bernard T. Lee, M.D., M.B.A., M.P.H., Work Group Chair, has no relevant disclosures; Jayant P. Agarwal, M.D., has received research support from Mentor Corporation, Life-Cell Corporation, DePuy Synthes, and NIH, as the PI in grants funded by DSM Biomedical, and served as a consultant for DonJoy Orthopedics; Jeffrey A. Ascherman, M.D., Stephanie A. Ca-terson, M.D., Diedra D. Gray, M.P.H., Scott T. Hollenbeck, M.D., Seema A. Khan, M.D., Lauren D. Loeding, M.P.H., Raman C. Mahabir, M.D., and Archibald S. Miller, M.D., have no relevant disclosures; Galen Perdikis, M.D., has served as a teacher for IHE; Jaime S. Schwartz, M.D., has received research support from Covidien, Ltd, and served on the Advisory Board of Mentor Corporation, receiving honorarium; Beth A. Sieling, M.D., has served as a consultant for Myriad and Genomic Health; Achilles Thoma, M.D., has no relevant disclosures; Judith A. Wolfman, M.D., has served on the Advisory Board of Hologic; Jean L. Wright, M.D., has no relevant disclosures.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2017 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - The American Society of Plastic Surgeons commissioned a multi-stakeholder Work Group to develop recommendations for autologous breast reconstruction with abdominal flaps. A systematic literature review was performed and a stringent appraisal process was used to rate the quality of relevant scientific research. The Work Group assigned to draft this guideline was unable to find evidence of superiority of one technique over the other (deep inferior epigastric perforator versus pedicled transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap) in autologous tissue reconstruction of the breast after mastectomy. Presently, based on the evidence reported here, the Work Group recommends that surgeons contemplating breast reconstruction on their next patient consider the following: the patient’s preferences and risk factors, the setting in which the surgeon works (academic versus community practice), resources available, the evidence shown in this guideline, and, equally important, the surgeon’s technical expertise. Although theoretical superiority of one technique may exist, this remains to be reported in the literature, and future methodologically robust studies are needed.
AB - The American Society of Plastic Surgeons commissioned a multi-stakeholder Work Group to develop recommendations for autologous breast reconstruction with abdominal flaps. A systematic literature review was performed and a stringent appraisal process was used to rate the quality of relevant scientific research. The Work Group assigned to draft this guideline was unable to find evidence of superiority of one technique over the other (deep inferior epigastric perforator versus pedicled transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap) in autologous tissue reconstruction of the breast after mastectomy. Presently, based on the evidence reported here, the Work Group recommends that surgeons contemplating breast reconstruction on their next patient consider the following: the patient’s preferences and risk factors, the setting in which the surgeon works (academic versus community practice), resources available, the evidence shown in this guideline, and, equally important, the surgeon’s technical expertise. Although theoretical superiority of one technique may exist, this remains to be reported in the literature, and future methodologically robust studies are needed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85033401917&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85033401917&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003768
DO - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003768
M3 - Article
C2 - 29068921
AN - SCOPUS:85033401917
SN - 0032-1052
VL - 140
SP - 651e-664e
JO - Plastic and reconstructive surgery
JF - Plastic and reconstructive surgery
IS - 5
ER -