The Triangular Dart Flap: A Reconstructive Option for Soft Tissue Defects.

INTRODUCTION: Reconstruction of soft tissue defects after skin cancer excision remains a challenge. Options for reconstruction are numerous, including primary repair, local tissue rearrangement, and skin grafts, among others. In this series, the authors present a novel technique: The triangular dart flap. This is a single-stage tissue rearrangement that uses the redundant tissue of the dog-ear to aid in the closure of these wounds. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients undergoing local tissue rearrangements by the senior author from 2009 to 2018. Factors were collected and analyzed, including age, size and cause of defect, comorbidities, smoking history, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients underwent reconstruction with a triangular dart flap for repair of malignant defects. Mean defect size was 7.3 cm2 (0.8-20 cm2), and mean repair size was 29.7 cm2 (6-80 cm2). Initial pathology included basal cell carcinoma (45.8%), melanoma in situ (29.2%), and squamous cell carcinoma (16.7%), among others. Location varied widely among face and extremities. Anesthesia was predominantly local only (79.1%). There were no major complications, and 5 (20.8%) minor complications. CONCLUSIONS: The triangular dart flap is a novel single-stage procedure, generally performed under local anesthesia only, for correction of Mohs defects. By using the redundant tissue of dog-ears to better approximate the wound edges, a tension-free primary closure can be achieved in sensitive areas, such as the nasal tip.

Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction in High-Body Mass Index Patients.

BACKGROUND: The effect of body mass index (BMI) on complication rates in prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction is not well established. The purpose of this study was to compare complication rates between different BMI groups in subpectoral and prepectoral reconstruction. METHODS: A single-surgeon, 4-year, retrospective review was performed of consecutive prosthetic breast reconstructions. During this time, the senior author's practice shifted from a subpectoral to prepectoral technique. Patients were stratified into BMI subgroups (<25, 25-35, and >35 kg/m2) and complication rates were analyzed. A survey was administered to blinded medical personnel and patients comparing esthetic results. RESULTS: Implant-based reconstructions were performed in 195 patients (103 subpectoral and 92 prepectoral). No significant difference in major complication rate was observed between techniques. Among patients with BMI greater than 35 kg/m2, implant exposure occurred at a significantly higher rate in the prepectoral group (P = 0.04). In patients with BMI greater than 25 kg/m2, minor asymmetry was more prevalent with prepectoral reconstruction (12.3% vs 0%; P = 0.02). Regardless of technique, the odds of reoperation increased by 7% per point increase in BMI, although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.07; odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.15).A total of 66 survey responses were received. Physicians rated esthetic results more positively than patients did. Patients with a BMI of less than 25 kg/m2 were rated better than other BMI groups in nearly all categories. The position of submuscular reconstruction was rated significantly better than prepectoral. CONCLUSIONS: There is a trend toward higher complication rates in prepectoral versus subpectoral breast reconstruction with increasing BMI. Nonetheless, the technique appears to be safe, with comparable clinical and cosmetic results.

Hematoma Risks of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs Used in Plastic Surgery Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The opioid crisis in America has sparked a shift toward a multimodality perioperative pain regimen. The use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the perioperative period decreases opioid consumption and increases efficacy. However, many plastic surgeons avoid their use because of antiplatelet effects. The purpose of this article is to systematically review the plastic surgery literature to assess the risk of intraoperative or postoperative bleeding and hematoma formation. METHODS: A systematic review of articles published in PubMed was performed in September 2018 to investigate the incidence of increased bleeding and hematoma formation with use of NSAIDs in the perioperative period in plastic surgery. All articles were reviewed for primary outcome measures, and a selective literature review was performed to examine perioperative NSAID use in other surgical subspecialties. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: Our search yielded 806 total articles, with 15 meeting inclusion criteria, and this included 3064 patients (1679 with perioperative NSAIDs, 1385 with no NSAIDs). There was no significant difference in overall incidence of bleeding/hematoma in the treatment group versus control (no NSAIDs). The overall pooled odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were 1.20 and 0.73 to 1.97 (P = 0.48). When separated by drug administered across all plastic surgery procedures, there were no statistically significant differences in incidences of hematoma or increased bleeding with use of ketorolac (OR, 1.48 [0.86-2.56]; P = 0.57), ibuprofen (OR, 0.55 [0.14-2.14]; P = 0.87), or celecoxib (OR, 0.22 [0.02-2.52]; P = 0.39). When examining NSAID use in breast surgery, there was no statistically significant difference in incidence of hematoma or increased bleeding when combining all 3 drug types (OR, 1.39 [0.82-2.37]; P = 0.60). Some individual studies demonstrated trends toward increased bleeding/hematoma in reduction mammoplasties. CONCLUSIONS: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs significantly improve pain control and decrease opioid use when used in plastic surgery. The majority of evidence in plastic surgery does not support an increased incidence of bleeding/hematoma with the use of perioperative NSAIDs.

Outcomes Analysis of Chief Cosmetic Clinic Over 13 Years.

BACKGROUND: Adequate resident training in aesthetic surgery has become increasingly important with rising demand. Chief resident aesthetic clinics allow hands on experience with an appropriate amount of autonomy. The purpose of this study was to compare resident cosmetic clinic outcomes to those reported in the literature. Furthermore, we sought to assess how effective these clinics can be in preparing residents in performing common aesthetic surgery procedures. METHOD: A retrospective chart review of 326 patients and 714 aesthetic procedures in our chief cosmetic clinic over a 13-year period was performed, and complication and revision rates were recorded. In addition, an electronic survey was sent to 26 prior chief residents regarding their experience and impressions of the chief resident aesthetic clinic. RESULT: A total of 713 procedures were performed on 326 patients. Patient ages ranged from 5 to 75 years old (mean, 40.8 years old) with a mean follow-up of 76.2 days. On average, there were 56 procedures performed per year. Of the 714 total procedures performed, there were 136 minor procedures and 578 major procedures. Of the 136 minor procedures, there were no complications and there was 1 revision of a cosmetic injection. Of the 578 major procedures, the overall complication rate was 6.1% and the revision rate was 12.8%. Complication and revision rates for each individual surgery were further analyzed and compared with the literature. The complication rates for these procedures fell within the reference ranges reported. In regards to the chief resident survey, there was a 77% response rate. All respondents reported that the chief resident clinic positively affected their residency education and future practice. Ninety percent of respondents felt "very comfortable" performing facelifts, body contouring, and aesthetic breast surgery. No respondents completed a subsequent cosmetic fellowship, and 60% stated that their positive experience in chief clinic contributed to their decision not to pursue a cosmetic fellowship. CONCLUSIONS: Chief resident clinics can provide results with acceptable complication and revision rates that fall within the acceptable ranges in the literature. In addition, it provides a valuable experience that leaves residents with high comfort levels in performing key procedures in aesthetic surgery.

Efficacy of Abductor Pollicis Longus Suspensionplasty Compared to Ligament Reconstruction and Tendon Interposition.

Background: Multiple surgical techniques are described for basal joint osteoarthritis. This study compares clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction with trapeziectomy and abductor pollicis longus (APL) suspensionplasty compared to trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) when performed by 2 fellowship-trained hand surgeons. Methods: A retrospective review of 51 consecutive patients undergoing APL suspensionplasty (53 hands) was performed. With this technique, a distally based APL slip is brought through and sewn to the flexor carpi radialis (FCR). The remaining APL is placed in the trapeziectomy void. This technique was compared to 151 patients (166 hands) who underwent LRTI using the FCR tendon. Outcomes assessed included postoperative pain relief, grip and pinch strength, complications, and need for reoperation. Two-tailed, Fisher's exact test was used for data analysis. Results: APL suspensionplasty resulted in postoperative pain relief in 92.5% (n = 49) compared to 94.0% (n = 156) with LRTI (P = .758). Mean postoperative grip and pinch strengths with APL suspensionplasty were 41.2 and 10.4 kg, respectively. With LRTI, average grip strength was 42.0 kg, and pinch was 10.1 kg. Both techniques were well tolerated with minimal complications. In the APL group, 1 patient had a postoperative infection requiring drainage. Among the LRTI cases, 1 wound dehiscence required closure, and 2 minor postoperative wound infections resolved with oral antibiotics. Mean follow-up time among APL suspensionplasty patients was 3.3 months compared to 8.4 months following LRTI. Conclusions: APL suspensionplasty is a safe, effective procedure which provides similar pain relief and functional outcomes compared to LRTI.

Broadening applications and insights into the cross-paramedian forehead flap over a 19-year period.

BACKGROUND: Forehead flap reconstruction of large nasal defects can be challenging. The senior author has used a paramedian forehead flap modification using the supratrochlear artery on the contralateral side of the defect. METHODS: A 9-year retrospective review (2008-2016) was performed for patients undergoing nasal reconstruction with the cross-paramedian forehead flap. Outcomes were analyzed by comparing our previous reviews, which allows us to analyze patient outcomes for over 19 years. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were identified. The aasal defect was most frequently due to basal cell carcinoma (n = 37, 69.8%). Twenty-three (43%) patients were smokers, and nine (17%) had diabetes. The mean defect size was 12.9 cm2, involving an average of 2.6 nasal subunits. One-third of the patients had cartilage defects (n = 18) and mucosal lining defects (n = 19). Periorbital involvement was present in five patients. Complications included partial flap loss (n = 6), donor site dehiscence (n = 4), flap dehiscence (n = 2), and postoperative infection (n = 1). Only two of the partial flap losses were considered significant, as they required additional reconstructive procedures for soft tissue coverage. Complications were 12 times as likely as those in diabetes (OR = 11.97, p = 0.007, 95% CI 1.94-72.44), six times as likely as those in cartilage defects (OR = 6.4, p = 0.007, 95% CI 1.64-24.92), and nearly five times as likely as those in mucosal lining defects (OR = 4.8, p = 1.27-18.09, 95% CI 1.27-18.09). Thirty-one patients required revisions most commonly for flap debulking (n = 16). CONCLUSION: The cross-paramedian forehead flap is a reliable option in the armamentarium of the reconstructive surgeon for large and complex defects in addition to those with periorbital extension. SUMMARY: Coverage of distal nasal defects after tumor extirpation remains a challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. Our institution uses the cross-paramedian forehead flap for these defects. This flap is based on the supratrochlear artery on the contralateral side of the defect and is oriented obliquely across the forehead for additional length and an improved donor site scar at the level of the eyebrow. The technique and outcomes were published in 2009, and this manuscript serves as an update on outcomes and applications during the past 9 years. By including all our data, we can analyze outcomes for over 19 years. During the past 9 years, 53 patients underwent the cross-paramedian forehead flap technique between 2008 and 2016. These patients were found to have an average defect size of 12.9 cm2 and an average loss of 2.6 nasal subunits. Cartilage defects were present in 34.6% (n = 18) and mucosal defects were present in 36.5% (n = 19) of patients. Five patients had periorbital reconstruction with the forehead flap, of which three patients underwent a single-stage islandized forehead flap reconstruction. Given the large defect size, additional local flaps were frequently used, including nasolabial flaps (n = 16) and cheek rearrangement (n = 11). Complications included partial flap loss (n = 6), donor site dehiscence (n = 4), and postoperative infection (n = 1). Only two of these partial flap losses were considered significant, as they required additional reconstructive procedures to address areas of soft tissue loss. Increased rates of complications were associated with the presence of diabetes and defect characteristics, which reflects increased complexity including mucosal and cartilage loss. When comparing with our prior review of this technique, the more recent population have had increasing complexity of the nasal defects with a large surface area involvement. Overall, the cross-paramedian forehead flap is a reliable option in the armamentarium of the reconstructive surgeon for large and distal nasal defects.

Extensive Hand Thermal and Blast Injury From Electronic Cigarette Explosion: A Case Report.

Background: As the use of electronic cigarettes rises, more reports of injuries related to device explosion are surfacing. Methods: Presented here is the case of a 35-year-old man sustaining extensive thermal and blast injuries to his hand when the device exploded while he was holding it. He required multiple surgeries involving groin flap coverage, tendon transfer, and nerve grafting to optimize his postinjury function. Results: While much of his hand function has been restored, he has continued deficits in range of motion and sensation as a result of the incident. Conclusions: With increasing numbers of such injuries, hand surgeons must be aware of the blast mechanism involved so as to avoid missing deep soft tissue injury or disruption of deep structures, as demonstrated in this case.

Use of Integra in the Management of Complex Hand Wounds From Cancer Resection and Nonburn Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Despite extensive use of Integra in burn reconstruction, little has been published regarding its utility in complex hand wounds from nonburn trauma or cancer resection. This study aimed to review outcomes following Integra use for hand reconstruction following cancer resection or nonburn trauma with exposed bone, joints, and/or tendons. METHODS: Retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing hand reconstruction with Integra for exposed bones, joints, or tendons over a 6-year period at a single institution. RESULTS: Fourteen patients underwent hand reconstruction using Integra, 8 following cancer resection and 6 following acute nonburn trauma. The mean defect size was 19 cm2, 79% had exposed tendon without peritenon, 43% had exposed bone without periosteum, and 28% had exposed joint capsule. Mean time from Integra to skin graft was 11.3 days, and negative-pressure wound therapy did not significantly decrease the mean time from Integra to skin graft placement ( P = .76). Overall, 13 patients achieved successful reconstruction with mean skin graft take of 97%, and 1 required revision amputation at the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint. Six months postoperative, 92% patients had return of preoperative hand function. Without any surgical revision, 85% of patients were extremely satisfied with the aesthetic result and 15% were fairly satisfied. CONCLUSIONS: Integra is an effective method to treat complex hand wounds with exposed bone, joints, and/or tendons. This technique can be used in the office, lessens the need for local or free flap coverage, and provides an excellent aesthetic outcome. Integra should be considered a viable option in hand reconstruction algorithm.