Mandibular Distraction in Neonatal Pierre Robin Sequence: Is Immediate Extubation Both Feasible and Safe?

BACKGROUND: The timing of extubation following placement of mandibular distractors in the setting of Pierre Robin sequence is variable across institutional algorithms. Postoperative maintenance of intubation allows for an improvement in airway dimension and tongue positioning before extubation, theoretically decreasing the impact of postoperative airway edema. Maintenance of intubation, however, is not without risk. The authors analyze their institutional experience with neonatal mandibular distraction followed by immediate extubation to assess feasibility and safety profiles. METHODS: A 4-year retrospective review of patients diagnosed with Pierre Robin sequence who underwent mandibular distraction within the first 3 months of life was performed. Patients intubated preoperatively were excluded. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients met inclusion criteria. Thirty-eight patients (73 percent) were extubated immediately, whereas 14 patients (27 percent) remained intubated. No differences between these groups were found when comorbidities, cleft pathology, preoperative respiratory support, or grade of view on direct laryngoscopy were analyzed. Case duration greater than 120 minutes, operation start time after 3 pm, and the subjective designation of a difficult airway by the anesthesiologist were associated with maintaining intubation (p < 0.05). Eight patients (21 percent) in the extubated group required an increase in respiratory support in the postoperative interval. Four of these patients (11 percent) required reintubation. Increased postoperative respiratory support was more likely in patients with certain comorbidities and higher preoperative respiratory support requirements (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The authors' data suggest that immediate extubation following neonatal mandibular distraction is feasible in patients who are not intubated preoperatively. Careful consideration should be given to patients who require significant respiratory support preoperatively and in those with certain comorbidities. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Secondary Surgeries After Oncoplastic Reduction Mammoplasty.

PURPOSE: The oncoplastic reduction approach is a popular option for women with breast cancer and macromastia. Although the benefits of this approach are numerous, data on the need for secondary surgeries are limited. We evaluated the need for all secondary surgeries after oncoplastic reduction in an attempt to understand the incidence and indications. METHODS: All patients with breast cancer who underwent an oncoplastic breast reduction at the time of the tumor resection were queried from a prospectively maintained database from 1998 to 2020 (n = 547) at a single institution. Secondary surgical procedures were defined as any unplanned return to the operating room. Demographic and clinical variables were analyzed, and secondary surgeries were classified and evaluated. The timing and rates of secondary surgery were evaluated and compared with clinical variables. RESULTS: There were 547 patients included in this series with a mean age of 55 years and body mass index of 33.5. Mean duration of follow-up was 3.8 years. One hundred and seventeen (21%) patients underwent 235 secondary surgeries, with an average of 1.4 operations until stable reconstruction was obtained. The reason for the secondary surgery was involved margins (7.5%), major complications (8.6%), aesthetic improvement (13.3%), and completion mastectomy (5.3%). Age 65 years and younger age was associated with any subsequent procedure (P = 0.023) and revision for cosmesis (P = 0.006). Patients with body mass index greater than 35 had increased secondary surgeries for operative complications (P = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Secondary surgeries after oncoplastic breast reduction procedures are common. Management of margins and complications, such as hematoma and infection, are early indications, with aesthetic improvement, wound healing complications, fat necrosis, and recurrence being late reasons. The most common reason for reoperation is aesthetic improvement, especially in younger patients. Attention to surgical technique and patient selection will help minimize secondary surgeries for the nononcological reasons.

The systemic response to surgery triggers the outgrowth of distant immune-controlled tumors in mouse models of dormancy.

Patients undergoing surgical resection of primary breast tumors confront a risk for metastatic recurrence that peaks sharply 12 to 18 months after surgery. The cause of early metastatic relapse in breast cancer has long been debated, with many ascribing these relapses to the natural progression of the disease. Others have proposed that some aspect of surgical tumor resection triggers the outgrowth of otherwise-dormant metastases, leading to the synchronous pattern of relapse. Clinical data cannot distinguish between these hypotheses, and previous experimental approaches have not provided clear answers. Such uncertainty hinders the development and application of therapeutic approaches that could potentially reduce early metastatic relapse. We describe an experimental model system that definitively links surgery and the subsequent wound-healing response to the outgrowth of tumor cells at distant anatomical sites. Specifically, we find that the systemic inflammatory response induced after surgery promotes the emergence of tumors whose growth was otherwise restricted by a tumor-specific T cell response. Furthermore, we demonstrate that perioperative anti-inflammatory treatment markedly reduces tumor outgrowth in this model, suggesting that similar approaches might substantially reduce early metastatic recurrence in breast cancer patients.