Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 17, 2026
An Experimental Human DIEP Flap Model to Investigate Preservation Strategies for Vascularized Composite Allografts and Free Flaps
Published on: December 5, 2025
Population Assessment of Anatomic Eligibility for Robotic-Assisted DIEP Flap
Jacquelyn Roth1, Maxwell Godek1, Ethan Fung1
1Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Background:
Compared with traditional deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction procedures, robotic-assisted DIEP (R-DIEP) minimizes abdominal wall morbidity by reducing fascial incision length. Optimal R-DIEP candidates have large perforators with short intramuscular courses, but no large-scale studies have quantified their prevalence. This study aims to identify the proportion of patients who are anatomically eligible for R-DIEP.
Methods:
A retrospective review of patients who underwent magnetic resonance angiography perforator mapping prior to DIEP flap breast reconstruction between 2019 and 2023 was conducted. Patient demographics were collected. "Dominant perforator" was defined as the largest perforator at or below the level of the umbilicus. The intramuscular course of each perforator was calculated as the hypotenuse of a theoretical prism connecting its entry and exit points with respect to the rectus abdominis muscle. Perforator diameter was measured at the anterior rectus sheath. "Conservative" (intramuscular course ≤ 2.5 cm) and "liberal" (intramuscular course ≤ 5 cm) eligibility criteria were applied. Perforator diameter > 2 mm was used as a secondary criterion.
Results:
A total of 574 dominant perforators were identified in 287 patients. The average intramuscular length of each perforator was 3.8 ± 1.9 cm (range: 0-11.0 cm). Twenty-nine percent of dominant perforators (n = 165) had an intramuscular course length ≤ 2.5 cm, 77% (n = 441) had an intramuscular course length ≤ 5 cm, and 2.3% (n = 13) were paramuscular (no intramuscular course). Forty-six percent of patients (n = 132) had at least one dominant perforator (i.e., left- or right-sided) with an intramuscular course ≤ 2.5 cm, and 93% of patients (n = 268) had at least one dominant perforator with an intramuscular course ≤ 5 cm. Thirty-one percent of dominant perforators (n = 185) had a diameter > 2 mm and an intramuscular course ≤ 2.5 cm, and 49% of dominant perforators (n = 281) had a diameter > 2 mm and an intramuscular course ≤ 5 cm.
Conclusion:
A substantial portion of the population is anatomically eligible for R-DIEP breast reconstruction, especially when liberal criteria are applied.
