**4.2 Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative outcome indexes between the two groups**

In the observation group, the number of preoperative location perforations was (2.90 ± 1.13), while that in the control group was (3.21 ± 1.46), and the difference was statistically significant. In terms of perforator decision time and perforator anatomy time, the observation group was shorter than the control group (*P* < 0.001), as shown in **Table 2**. The acquisition time of donor flap was (50.05 ± 10.94) min in the observation group and (84.8 ± 15.44) min in the control group. Donor site flap


#### **Table 1.**

*Comparison of baseline data between two groups.*


#### *Application of CT Angiography in Delayed DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112913*

#### **Table 2.**

*Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative indicators between two groups.*

acquisition time was shorter in the observation group, and the difference was statistically significant (*P* < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the total operation time between the two groups (*P* = 0.809) (**Figure 1**). The total weight of the flap was (730.62 ± 127.31) g in the observation group and (718.25 ± 129.36) g in the control group, showing no difference.

In the comparison of postoperative complications between the two groups, there were no statistical differences in abdominal incision infection rate, fat necrosis rate and flap complete necrosis rate (*P* > 0.05). In the comparison of secondary surgical exploration rate, the CTA group was lower than the US group (*P* < 0.001) (**Figure 2**).
