الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 112 |  |  |
| | | from | 112 | | |
Abstract
The DIEP flap arose as a refinement of the traditional TRAM flap in order to decrease abdominal donor-site morbidity by minimizing fascia and muscles included in the flap.
In 1989, Koshima published the initial utilisation of the inferior epigastric artery perforator flap when they introduced a couple of cases in which they have dissected the perforator vessels of the deep inferior epigastric vessels supplying the lower abdominal tissue through the rectus sheath showing that it was possible to harvest the same amount of tissue as in the TRAM flap with preserving the rectus abdominis muscle.(2)
In 1994 Allen described using the DIEP flap for the first time in breast reconstruction when he presented fifteen case of successful breast reconstruction using the same design as in TRAM flap. Many publications in the following years established the role of DIEP to the extent that it has been the standard tool of breast reconstruction in many centers.(3)
As the perforators’ number harvested in DIEP flap is less than those in pedicled or free TRAM , so there was a debate among authors regarding the effect of the number of perforators.
The current study aim was to evaluate the impact of perforators’ number harvested on the overall survival of the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap and flap-related complications in addition to donor site complications.
A prospective assessment of all DIEP flaps performed for patients who had free-flap breast reconstruc¬tion in the interval between January 2020 till June 2021 were included in the study.
Flaps were subdivided in to 3 groups depending on the perforators’ number into single , double and triple perforators comparing demographics, operative details and outcomes based on the perforators’ number.