Skip to main content
. 2024 Feb 5;12(2):e5624. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005624

Table 1.

Authors and Characteristics of Included Studies

Authors Period Type LOE Patients* Type of Flaps Flaps* Follow-up
(Mo)
Haddock et al1 2011–2016 Retr. IV 128 DIEP 256 1
Bauermeister et al25 2010–2016 Retr. IV 50 MS-TRAM (74%)
DIEP (24%)
SIEA (2%)
77 NR
Gösseringer et al26 2011–2013 Retr. IV 100 DIEP (100%) 100 NR
Razdan et al27 2014–2016 Retr. IV 136 MS-TRAM
DIEP
SIEA
272 NR
Weichman et al28 2011–2014 Retr. IV 157 DIEP (60%)
MS-TRAM (20.2%)
SIEA (1.6%)
PAP (12.5%)
TUG (0.4%)
SGAP (2%)
Stacked DIEP (3.2%)
248 NR
Asaad et al29 2010–2017 Retr. III 8680 NR 13,537 3
Mericli et al30 2016–2018 Retr. III 150 B/L DIEP (59.3%)
DIEP/TRAM (18%)
B/L TRAM (14%)
B/L PAP or TUG (7.3%)
SIEA/DIEP (NR)
SIEA/TRAM (NR)
300 15
*

Before propensity score matching.

The number of patients/flaps included in the formal analysis could be different depending on the subjects included in the “single surgeon” and “co-surgeon” group.

B/L, bilateral; DIEP, deep inferior epigastric perforator; LEO, level of evidence; MS, muscle-sparing; PAP, profunda artery perforator; Retr., retrospective; SIEA, superficial inferior epigastric artery; SGAP, superior gluteal artery perforator; TRAM, transverse rectus abdominis muscle; TUG, transverse upper gracilis; NR, not reported.