Ipsilateral pedicle TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction: are they as safe as contralateral techniques?

INTRODUCTION Many surgeons are using the ipsilateral rotation of the TRAM flap because of easier flap insetting and improved aesthetic outcomes; however studies evaluating these techniques are limited to case series without groups for comparison. Our purpose was to evaluate the safety of the ipsilateral technique through a retrospective cohort study. METHODS We retrospectively evaluated consecutive contralateral and ipsilateral TRAM flaps for mastectomy breast reconstruction. The incidence of ischemia-related flap complications and the incidence of major and minor complications were compared between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the effect of rotation type on complication rates, while controlling for potential confounding variables. RESULTS Comparing 58 ipsilateral to 32 contralateral pedicle TRAM patients, the rate of a major complication was 20.7% and 28.1%, respectively, p=0.425; a minor complication was 50.0% vs. 34.4%, respectively, p=0.153; and total ischemic-related flap complications were 22.4% and 25.0% respectively, p=0.781. When controlling for potential confounders, the type of pedicle TRAM flap did not have a significant effect on the above complications. Advanced patient age was significantly correlated with an increased incidence of major complications (OR=1.09, p=0.031) and ischemic flap complications (OR=1.11, p=0.016). CONCLUSION The ipsilateral pedicle TRAM flap appears as safe as the contralateral technique for breast reconstruction. Given the increased pedicle length and preservation of both the medial inframammary fold and xiphoid subunit, we believe that the ipsilateral technique is preferred over the contralateral rotation.