Page 33 - Read Online

Allam et al. Plast Aesthet Res 2024;11:19 https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2347-9264.2024.21 Page 13 of 16

Collectively, these technological breakthroughs signify a paradigm shift toward more tailored, efficient, and
effective methods in autologous breast reconstruction. These advancements aim to not only enhance patient
care but also offer significant benefits to surgeons. As the field continues to advance, the ongoing research
and clinical integration of these innovations will further refine their roles, solidifying their place in the
future of autologous breast reconstruction surgery.

DECLARATIONS
Author contributions
Background research, writing, and editing: Allam O, Foster C, Knoedler L, Knoedler S, Oh SJ, Pomahac B,
Ayyala HS

Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.

Financial support and sponsorship
The authors received no funding for data collection or preparation of the manuscript.

Conflicts of interest
All authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.

Consent for publication
Not applicable.

Copyright
© The Author(s) 2024.

REFERENCES
1. Nolan E, Lindeman GJ, Visvader JE. Deciphering breast cancer: from biology to the clinic. Cell 2023;186:1708-28. DOI
2. Nardin S, Mora E, Varughese FM, et al. Breast cancer survivorship, quality of life, and late toxicities. Front Oncol 2020;10:864. DOI
PubMed PMC
3. Al-Ghazal SK, Fallowfield L, Blamey RW. Comparison of psychological aspects and patient satisfaction following breast conserving
surgery, simple mastectomy and breast reconstruction. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:1938-43. DOI PubMed
4. Yueh JH, Slavin SA, Adesiyun T, et al. Patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparative evaluation of
DIEP, TRAM, latissimus flap, and implant techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;125:1585-95. DOI
5. Yun JH, Diaz R, Orman AG. Breast reconstruction and radiation therapy. Cancer Control 2018;25:1073274818795489. DOI PubMed
PMC
6. Pien I, Caccavale S, Cheung MC, et al. Evolving trends in autologous breast reconstruction: is the deep inferior epigastric artery
perforator flap taking over? Ann Plast Surg 2016;76:489-93. DOI
7. Wade RG, Razzano S, Sassoon EM, Haywood RM, Ali RS, Figus A. Complications in DIEP flap breast reconstruction after
mastectomy for breast cancer: a prospective cohort study comparing unilateral versus bilateral reconstructions. Ann Surg Oncol
2017;24:1465-74. DOI PubMed
8. Knoedler S, Kauke-Navarro M, Knoedler L, et al. The significance of timing in breast reconstruction after mastectomy: an ACS-
NSQIP analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2024;89:40-50. DOI PubMed
9. DeFazio MV, Arribas EM, Ahmad FI, et al. Application of three-dimensional printed vascular modeling as a perioperative guide to
perforator mapping and pedicle dissection during abdominal flap harvest for breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 2020;36:325-
38. DOI
10. Ogunleye AA, Deptula PL, Inchauste SM, et al. The utility of three-dimensional models in complex microsurgical reconstruction. Arch
Plast Surg 2020;47:428-34. DOI PubMed PMC
11. Chae MP, Hunter-Smith DJ, Chung RD, Smith JA, Rozen WM. 3D-printed, patient-specific DIEP flap templates for preoperative