Outcomes of internal mammary artery perforator flap in head and neck reconstruction: A systematic review

Abstract

AbstractThis study aims to evaluate the functional and prognostic outcomes associated with the internal mammary artery perforator (IMAP) flap in various head and neck defect repairs, given the current lack of clarity on its effectiveness. We performed a systematic review of various databases: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect using keywords such as “Internal mammary artery perforator flap” and “IMAP.” Screening and data extractions were performed by two individual reviewers. Articles were considered eligible if they included sufficient information on IMAP flap features, their applications in the head and neck, and outcomes. From 264 articles analyzed, 24 studies were included for qualitative analysis. Out of which, 125 patients who received internal mammary artery perforator flaps were included. Most of the patients, 103 (88%), received pedicled IMAP flaps, and 22 (12%) received IMAP free flaps. The second internal mammary artery (IMA) was favored as the single perforator (81.5%), with the combination of the first and second IMA being the primary choice for dual perforators (92.5%). IMAP flaps were predominantly single perforator flaps (65%), with 35% being dual perforator flaps. Among various applications, IMAP flaps are commonly employed in the reconstruction of neck defects (25.5%), pharyngocutaneous fistula repair (20.8%), and burn scar contracture restoration (8%). Only seven (5.6%) patients had flap complications, including venous congestion (1.6%), partial necrosis (1.6%), complete necrosis (1.6%), and incision dehiscence (0.8%). Donor sites were predominantly closed by the primary closure (92%). 3.2% of donor sites had minor complications. The average follow‐up was 12.6 (IQR: 6–18) months. This systematic review highlights the effectiveness and safety of IMAP flaps in head and neck reconstruction, with positive outcomes and minimal complications.