PlasmaBlade versus Electrocautery for Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Harvesting in Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Clinical Outcome Study

• Published in: Journal of clinical medicine 2024-04, Vol.13 (8), p.2388
• Main Authors: Augustin, Angela, Schoberleitner, Ines, Unterhumer, Sophie-Marie, Krapf, Johanna, Bauer, Thomas, Wolfram, Dolores
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abdomen; Body mass index; Chemotherapy; Clinical outcomes; Comparative analysis; Dissection; Electrocoagulation; Electrosurgery; Flaps (Surgery); Hospitalization; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Methods; Patient satisfaction; Regression analysis; Risk factors; Software; Statistical analysis; Statistical significance; Surgery; Transplantation of organs, tissues, etc; Variance analysis
• ISSN: 2077-0383; 2077-0383
• DOI: 10.3390/jcm13082388

(1) : DIEP-based breast reconstruction necessitates wide undermining at the abdominal donor site, creating large wound areas. Flap harvesting is usually conducted using electrosurgical dissection devices. This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes in patients after using the PEAK PlasmaBlade (PPB) versus monopolar electrocautery (MPE). (2) : This retrospective cohort study included 128 patients with DIEP-based breast reconstruction. Patient characteristics and information on the postoperative course were collected and a comparative evaluation was conducted. (3) : The MPE group exhibited significantly ( * = 0.0324) higher abdominal drainage volume (351.11 ± 185.96 mL) compared to the PPB group (279.38 ± 183.38 mL). A subgroup analysis demonstrated that PPB significantly reduced postoperative wound fluid in patients with BMI > 30 kg/m ( * = 0.0284), without prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy ( ** = 0.0041), and among non-smokers ( = 0.0046). Furthermore, postoperative pain was significantly ( *** < 0.0001) lower in the PPB cohort. (4) : This study confirms the non-inferiority of the PEAK PlasmaBlade to conventional electrocautery for abdominal flap harvesting. The PPB demonstrated advantages, notably reduced drainage volume and lower postoperative pain levels. Recognizing patient subsets that benefit more from the PPB highlights the importance of personalized device selection based on patient characteristics.