AC Portal
Document Navigator

Imaging of Deep Inferior Epigastric Arteries for Surgical Planning (Breast Reconstruction Surgery)

Variant: 1   Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
Procedure Appropriateness Category Relative Radiation Level
MRA abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast Usually Appropriate O
CTA abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast Usually Appropriate ☢☢☢☢
MRA abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast May Be Appropriate O
US color Doppler abdomen and pelvis Usually Not Appropriate O
Arteriography abdomen and pelvis Usually Not Appropriate ☢☢☢☢
MRI abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast Usually Not Appropriate O
MRI abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast Usually Not Appropriate O
CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast Usually Not Appropriate ☢☢☢
CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast Usually Not Appropriate ☢☢☢
CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast Usually Not Appropriate ☢☢☢☢

Panel Members
Nimarta Singh, MD, MPHa; Ayaz Aghayev, MDb; Sarah Ahmad, MDc; Ezana M. Azene, MD, PhDd; Maros Ferencik, MD, PhD, MCRe; Sandeep S. Hedgire, MDf; David S. Kirsch, MDg; Yoo Jin Lee, MDh; Prashant Nagpal, MDi; Helen A. Pass, MDj; Anil K. Pillai, MDk; Beth Ripley, MD, PhDl; Andrew Tannenbaum, MDm; Richard Thomas, MD, MBBSn; Michael L. Steigner, MDo.
Summary of Literature Review
Introduction/Background
Special Imaging Considerations
Initial Imaging Definition

Initial imaging is defined as imaging at the beginning of the care episode for the medical condition defined by the variant. More than one procedure can be considered usually appropriate in the initial imaging evaluation when:

  • There are procedures that are equivalent alternatives (i.e., only one procedure will be ordered to provide the clinical information to effectively manage the patient’s care)

OR

  • There are complementary procedures (i.e., more than one procedure is ordered as a set or simultaneously wherein each procedure provides unique clinical information to effectively manage the patient’s care).
Discussion of Procedures by Variant
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
A. Arteriography abdomen and pelvis
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
B. CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
C. CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
D. CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
E. CTA abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
F. MRA abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
G. MRA abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
H. MRI abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
I. MRI abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast
Variant 1: Imaging of deep inferior epigastric arteries for surgical planning (breast reconstruction surgery). Initial imaging.
J. US color Doppler abdomen and pelvis
Summary of Highlights
Supporting Documents

The evidence table, literature search, and appendix for this topic are available at https://acsearch.acr.org/list. The appendix includes the strength of evidence assessment and the final rating round tabulations for each recommendation.

For additional information on the Appropriateness Criteria methodology and other supporting documents, please go to the ACR website at https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Clinical-Tools-and-Reference/Appropriateness-Criteria.

Appropriateness Category Names and Definitions

Appropriateness Category Name

Appropriateness Rating

Appropriateness Category Definition

Usually Appropriate

7, 8, or 9

The imaging procedure or treatment is indicated in the specified clinical scenarios at a favorable risk-benefit ratio for patients.

May Be Appropriate

4, 5, or 6

The imaging procedure or treatment may be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios as an alternative to imaging procedures or treatments with a more favorable risk-benefit ratio, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is equivocal.

May Be Appropriate (Disagreement)

5

The individual ratings are too dispersed from the panel median. The different label provides transparency regarding the panel’s recommendation. “May be appropriate” is the rating category and a rating of 5 is assigned.

Usually Not Appropriate

1, 2, or 3

The imaging procedure or treatment is unlikely to be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is likely to be unfavorable.

Relative Radiation Level Information

Potential adverse health effects associated with radiation exposure are an important factor to consider when selecting the appropriate imaging procedure. Because there is a wide range of radiation exposures associated with different diagnostic procedures, a relative radiation level (RRL) indication has been included for each imaging examination. The RRLs are based on effective dose, which is a radiation dose quantity that is used to estimate population total radiation risk associated with an imaging procedure. Patients in the pediatric age group are at inherently higher risk from exposure, because of both organ sensitivity and longer life expectancy (relevant to the long latency that appears to accompany radiation exposure). For these reasons, the RRL dose estimate ranges for pediatric examinations are lower as compared with those specified for adults (see Table below). Additional information regarding radiation dose assessment for imaging examinations can be found in the ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction document.

Relative Radiation Level Designations

Relative Radiation Level*

Adult Effective Dose Estimate Range

Pediatric Effective Dose Estimate Range

O

0 mSv

 0 mSv

<0.1 mSv

<0.03 mSv

☢☢

0.1-1 mSv

0.03-0.3 mSv

☢☢☢

1-10 mSv

0.3-3 mSv

☢☢☢☢

10-30 mSv

3-10 mSv

☢☢☢☢☢

30-100 mSv

10-30 mSv

*RRL assignments for some of the examinations cannot be made, because the actual patient doses in these procedures vary as a function of a number of factors (e.g., region of the body exposed to ionizing radiation, the imaging guidance that is used). The RRLs for these examinations are designated as “Varies.”

References
1. Aubry S, Pauchot J, Kastler A, Laurent O, Tropet Y, Runge M. Preoperative imaging in the planning of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap surgery. Skeletal Radiol. 2013;42(3):319-327.
2. Karunanithy N, Rose V, Lim AK, Mitchell A. CT angiography of inferior epigastric and gluteal perforating arteries before free flap breast reconstruction. Radiographics. 2011;31(5):1307-1319.
3. Chernyak V, Rozenblit AM, Greenspun DT, et al. Breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap: 3.0-T gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging for preoperative localization of abdominal wall perforators. Radiology. 2009;250(2):417-424.
4. Tseng CY, Lipa JE. Perforator flaps in breast reconstruction. [Review]. Clinics in Plastic Surgery. 37(4):641-54, vi-ii, 2010 Oct.Clin Plast Surg. 37(4):641-54, vi-ii, 2010 Oct.
5. Hijjawi JB, Blondeel PN. Advancing deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction through multidetector row computed tomography: an evolution in preoperative imaging. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010;26(1):11-20.
6. American College of Radiology. ACR–NASCI–SIR–SPR Practice Parameter for the Performance and Interpretation of Body Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA). Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=164+&releaseId=2.
7. Casey WJ, 3rd, Chew RT, Rebecca AM, Smith AA, Collins JM, Pockaj BA. Advantages of preoperative computed tomography in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123(4):1148-1155.
8. Gacto-Sanchez P, Sicilia-Castro D, Gomez-Cia T, et al. Computed tomographic angiography with VirSSPA three-dimensional software for perforator navigation improves perioperative outcomes in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125(1):24-31.
9. Ghattaura A, Henton J, Jallali N, et al. One hundred cases of abdominal-based free flaps in breast reconstruction. The impact of preoperative computed tomographic angiography. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 63(10):1597-601, 2010 Oct.
10. Keys KA, Louie O, Said HK, Neligan PC, Mathes DW. Clinical utility of CT angiography in DIEP breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2013;66(3):e61-65.
11. Malhotra A, Chhaya N, Nsiah-Sarbeng P, Mosahebi A. CT-guided deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap localization -- better for the patient, the surgeon, and the hospital. Clin Radiol. 2013;68(2):131-138.
12. Masia J, Kosutic D, Clavero JA, Larranaga J, Vives L, Pons G. Preoperative computed tomographic angiogram for deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010;26(1):21-28.
13. Masia J, Larranaga J, Clavero JA, Vives L, Pons G, Pons JM. The value of the multidetector row computed tomography for the preoperative planning of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap: our experience in 162 cases. Ann Plast Surg. 2008;60(1):29-36.
14. Minqiang X, Lanhua M, Jie L, Dali M, Jinguo L. The value of multidetector-row CT angiography for pre-operative planning of breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric arterial perforator flaps. Br J Radiol. 2010;83(985):40-43.
15. Molina AR, Jones ME, Hazari A, Francis I, Nduka C. Correlating the deep inferior epigastric artery branching pattern with type of abdominal free flap performed in a series of 145 breast reconstruction patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2012;94(7):493-495.
16. Lam DL, Mitsumori LM, Neligan PC, Warren BH, Shuman WP, Dubinsky TJ. Pre-operative CT angiography and three-dimensional image post processing for deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstructive surgery. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1020):e1293-1297.
17. Scott JR, Liu D, Said H, Neligan PC, Mathes DW. Computed tomographic angiography in planning abdomen-based microsurgical breast reconstruction: a comparison with color duplex ultrasound. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125(2):446-453.
18. Teunis T, Heerma van Voss MR, Kon M, van Maurik JF. CT-angiography prior to DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Microsurgery. 2013;33(6):496-502.
19. Hummelink S, Hoogeveen YL, Schultze Kool LJ, Ulrich DJO. A New and Innovative Method of Preoperatively Planning and Projecting Vascular Anatomy in DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 143(6):1151e-1158e, 2019 06.
20. Ngaage LM, Hamed R, Oni G, et al. The Role of CT Angiography in Assessing Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Patency in Patients With Pre-existing Abdominal Scars. J Surg Res. 235:58-65, 2019 03.
21. Haddock NT, Dumestre DO, Teotia SS. Efficiency in DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction: The Real Benefit of Computed Tomographic Angiography Imaging. Plast Reconstr Surg. 146(4):719-723, 2020 10.
22. Kim SY, Lee KT, Mun GH. Computed Tomographic Angiography-Based Planning of Bipedicled DIEP Flaps with Intraflap Crossover Anastomosis: An Anatomical and Clinical Study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 138(3):409e-18e, 2016 Sep.
23. Myung Y, Choi B, Yim SJ, et al. The originating pattern of deep inferior epigastric artery: anatomical study and surgical considerations. Surg Radiol Anat. 40(8):873-879, 2018 Aug.
24. O'Malley RB, Robinson TJ, Kozlow JH, Liu PS. Computed Tomography Angiography for Preoperative Thoracoabdominal Flap Planning. [Review]. Radiol Clin North Am. 54(1):131-45, 2016 Jan.
25. Rozen WM, Ashton MW, Grinsell D. The branching pattern of the deep inferior epigastric artery revisited in-vivo: a new classification based on CT angiography. Clin Anat. 2010;23(1):87-92.
26. Suffee T, Pigneur F, Rahmouni A, Bosc R. Best choice of perforator vessel in autologous breast reconstruction: Virtual reality navigation vs radiologist analysis. A prospective study. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 49(6):333-8, 2015.
27. Wong KK, Stubbs E, McRae M, McRae M, CTA in preoperative planning for DIEP breast reconstruction: what the reconstructive surgeon wants to know. A modified Delphi study. Clin Radiol. 74(12):973.e15-973.e26, 2019 Dec.
28. Rozen WM, Ashton MW. Improving outcomes in autologous breast reconstruction. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2009;33(3):327-335.
29. Nanidis TG, Ridha H, Jallali N. The use of computed tomography for the estimation of DIEP flap weights in breast reconstruction: a simple mathematical formula. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(10):1352-1356.
30. Pennington DG, Rome P, Kitchener P. Predicting results of DIEP flap reconstruction: the flap viability index. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012;65(11):1490-1495.
31. Davis CR, Jones L, Tillett RL, Richards H, Wilson SM. Predicting venous congestion before DIEP breast reconstruction by identifying atypical venous connections on preoperative CTA imaging. Microsurgery. 39(1):24-31, 2019 Jan.
32. Wagels M, Pillay R, Saylor A, Vrtik L, Senewiratne S. Predicting venous insufficiency in flaps raised on the deep inferior epigastric system using computed tomography (CT) angiography. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 68(12):e200-2, 2015 Dec.
33. Han HH, Kang MK, Choe J, et al. Estimation of Contralateral Perfusion in the DIEP Flap by Scoring the Midline-Crossing Vessels in Computed Tomographic Angiography. Plast Reconstr Surg. 145(4):697e-705e, 2020 04.
34. Ohkuma R, Mohan R, Baltodano PA, et al. Abdominally based free flap planning in breast reconstruction with computed tomographic angiography: systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133(3):483-494.
35. Agrawal MD, Thimmappa ND, Vasile JV, et al. Autologous breast reconstruction: preoperative magnetic resonance angiography for perforator flap vessel mapping. J Reconstr Microsurg. 31(1):1-11, 2015 Jan.
36. Alonso-Burgos A, Garcia-Tutor E, Bastarrika G, Benito A, Dominguez PD, Zubieta JL. Preoperative planning of DIEP and SGAP flaps: preliminary experience with magnetic resonance angiography using 3-tesla equipment and blood-pool contrast medium. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010;63(2):298-304.
37. Chong LW, Lakshminarayan R, Akali A. Utilisation of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in the assessment of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap for breast reconstruction surgery. Clin Radiol. 74(6):445-449, 2019 06.
38. Cina A, Salgarello M, Barone-Adesi L, Rinaldi P, Bonomo L. Planning breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforating vessels: multidetector CT angiography versus color Doppler US. Radiology. 2010;255(3):979-987.
39. Greenspun D, Vasile J, Levine JL, et al. Anatomic imaging of abdominal perforator flaps without ionizing radiation: seeing is believing with magnetic resonance imaging angiography. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010;26(1):37-44.
40. Kurlander DE, Brown MS, Iglesias RA, Gulani V, Soltanian HT. Mapping the superficial inferior epigastric system and its connection to the deep system: An MRA analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 69(2):221-6, 2016 Feb.
41. Masia J, Kosutic D, Cervelli D, Clavero JA, Monill JM, Pons G. In search of the ideal method in perforator mapping: noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010;26(1):29-35.
42. Versluis B, Tuinder S, Boetes C, et al. Equilibrium-phase high spatial resolution contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 1.5T in preoperative imaging for perforator flap breast reconstruction. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71286.
43. Wade RG, Watford J, Wormald JCR, Bramhall RJ, Figus A. Perforator mapping reduces the operative time of DIEP flap breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance angiography. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 71(4):468-477, 2018 04.
44. Kiely J, Kumar M, Wade RG. The accuracy of different modalities of perforator mapping for unilateral DIEP flap breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2021;74:945-56.
45. Cina A, Barone-Adesi L, Rinaldi P, et al. Planning deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps for breast reconstruction: a comparison between multidetector computed tomography and magnetic resonance angiography. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(8):2333-2343.
46. Klasson S, Svensson H, Malm K, Wasselius J, Velander P. Preoperative CT angiography versus Doppler ultrasound mapping of abdominal perforator in DIEP breast reconstructions: A randomized prospective study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 68(6):782-6, 2015 Jun.
47. Mijuskovic B, Tremp M, Heimer MM, et al. Color Doppler ultrasound and computed tomographic angiography for perforator mapping in DIEP flap breast reconstruction revisited: A cohort study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 72(10):1632-1639, 2019 Oct.
48. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction. Available at: https://edge.sitecorecloud.io/americancoldf5f-acrorgf92a-productioncb02-3650/media/ACR/Files/Clinical/Appropriateness-Criteria/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria-Radiation-Dose-Assessment-Introduction.pdf.
Disclaimer

The ACR Committee on Appropriateness Criteria and its expert panels have developed criteria for determining appropriate imaging examinations for diagnosis and treatment of specified medical condition(s). These criteria are intended to guide radiologists, radiation oncologists and referring physicians in making decisions regarding radiologic imaging and treatment. Generally, the complexity and severity of a patient’s clinical condition should dictate the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Only those examinations generally used for evaluation of the patient’s condition are ranked.  Other imaging studies necessary to evaluate other co-existent diseases or other medical consequences of this condition are not considered in this document. The availability of equipment or personnel may influence the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Imaging techniques classified as investigational by the FDA have not been considered in developing these criteria; however, study of new equipment and applications should be encouraged. The ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of any specific radiologic examination or treatment must be made by the referring physician and radiologist in light of all the circumstances presented in an individual examination.