Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 16, 2026

In situ Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flap: A Rat Model of Myocutaneous Ischemia Reperfusion Injury
Published on: June 8, 2013
Refining the abdominal wall perforasome with clinical application
Joshua Meyerov1, Rachna Ram2, Damien Grinsell1
1Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Background And Purpose:
Perforator selection is critical during operative planning for deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap reconstruction. This study aimed to evaluate the anatomical variations in deep inferior epigastric artery (DIEA) perforators and their primary subcutaneous branching patterns within the perforasome, using three-dimensional computed tomography angiography (CTA) to develop a new nomenclature system.
Methods:
Abdominal CTA scans of 180 patients undergoing preoperative imaging for DIEP flap reconstruction were evaluated. Maximum intensity projection (MIP) and volume-rendering technique (VRT) reconstructions were used to map perforator anatomy. Branching patterns were correlated to the location and subcutaneous course of the perforators, at emergence from the anterior rectus sheath.
Results:
Perforators were classified into 3 main categories and further sub-classified based on the orientation of tributaries. Type I perforators were the most common (87.2%) and coursed as a single trunk (IA) or bifurcated with an internal angle ≤30° (IB). Type II perforators (7.5%) bifurcated at 180 ± 20° (IIA) or between 30° and 160° (IIB). Type III perforators (5.3%) produced 3 or more primary branches. On an average, there were 2.9 ± 1.6 perforators per hemi-abdomen. Larger caliber vessels were found closer to the umbilicus (P < 0.005). Most perforators (80.5%) exited the rectus sheath caudal to the umbilicus and coursed in an inferolateral direction.
Conclusions:
This study provides a novel classification of the primary subcutaneous perforasome branching patterns of DIEA perforators and highlights the clinical implications for improved flap design and operative outcomes.
Related Concept Videos
Esophageal Perforation-II: Clinical Manifestations and Management
Clinical Manifestations:
Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.
Endoscopic Procedures V: ERCP
Patient...

