The Correlation Between the Improvement in Patient's Quality of Life and Surgeon's Satisfaction Following Primary Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is the primary goal in breast augmentation, but in a few cases patient satisfaction and surgeon satisfaction are in disagreement. OBJECTIVES: The authors try to explain the reasons associated with disparity between patient and surgeon satisfaction. METHODS: Seventy-one patients who underwent primary breast augmentation with dual-plane technique, with inframammary or inferior hemi-periareolar incision, were enrolled in this prospective study. Quality of life was evaluated with BREAST-Q preoperatively and postoperatively. Preoperative and postoperative photographic analysis was performed by a heterogeneous group of experts who completed the validated Breast Aesthetic Scale (BAS). The patient satisfaction score was compared with the overall appearance as determined by the validated BAS; a difference in score of 1 or more was considered a discordant judgement. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS version 18.0, with values of P < .01 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: BREAST-Q analysis showed a significative improvement in quality of life on the psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and physical well-being chest scale and satisfaction with the breast (P < .01). Of the 71 pairs, 60 had a concordant judgment between patient and surgeon, and 11 were discordant. The score expressed by the patients (4.35 ± 0.69) was on average higher than that of the third-party observers (3.88 ± 0.58), with P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction is the main goal following the success of a surgical or medical procedure. BREAST-Q and photographs during the preoperative period are helpful to understanding the patient's real expectations.

"Thou Shalt Not Throw Away a Living Thing": Innovative Use of Perforator Flaps in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.

SUMMARY: Abdominal wall reconstruction represents a complex challenge for plastic surgeons, given the variable range of clinical situations requiring restoration of abdominal wall integrity. When significant myofascial defects are encountered, repair with either a synthetic or biological mesh is indicated, both of which have advantages and drawbacks. Taking inspiration from Gillies' fourth commandment of plastic surgery- Thou shalt not throw away a living thing -an innovative technique to obtain a vascularized autologous mesh from the tissues usually discarded during abdominal contouring procedures was conceived. The authors describe how to maximize the use of perforator flaps derived from abdominoplasty excision patterns in abdominal wall reconstruction to simultaneously obtain restoration of abdominal wall integrity and improvement of the abdominal contour.

Impact on Patient's Appearance Perception of Autologous and Implant Based Breast Reconstruction Following Mastectomy Using BREAST-Q.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a better quality of life with one of the two techniques and if the results are in line with those already present in the literature. The hypothesis from which we started is to demonstrate that cancer patients who undergo a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP) breast reconstruction surgery are more satisfied and have a higher level of quality of life compared to those subjected to an intervention of reconstruction with prosthesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing reconstruction from January 2010 to July 2018 were eligible for inclusion. This is a retrospective cohort study carried out using the patients of two plastic surgery departments who have undergone monolateral or bilateral implant-based or DIEP flap breast reconstruction. We administered BREAST-Q questionnaire electronically almost 2 year after surgery. Patients were divided into two groups: implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction with DIEP flaps. Baseline demographics and patient characteristics were analyzed using a Students t-test (continuous variables) or Chi-square/Fisher's exact test (categorical variables). Mean standard deviation BREAST-Q scores were reported for the overall cohort and by modality for the postoperative period. The linear regression model was applied to all BREAST-Q score with all predictor factors. RESULTS: Of the 1125 patients involved, only 325 met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in this study; specifically, 133 (41%) DIEP and 192 (59%) prosthetic reconstructions. We summarized the results of the principal scales of BREAST-Q module: satisfaction with breast, psychosocial well-being, satisfaction with outcome, and sexual well-being in which the autologous group was always more satisfied. We reported results of all linear regression models with higher values for the DIEP group independently from predictors. CONCLUSION: This is the first study performed on the Italian population that compares autologous surgical techniques with the implantation of breast implants. In this population, DIEP is considered the technique that leads to the highest satisfaction in all BREAST-Q scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Predictive Factors of Satisfaction Following Breast Reconstruction: Do they Influence Patients?

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to analyze whether there is any patient- or treatment-related factor that can influence patients' body perception after mastectomy and autologous or implant-based breast reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent immediate implant-based or DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Predictive factors analyzed included chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, body mass index, age, type of mastectomy, and follow-up length. The BREAST-Q was administered postoperatively almost 2 years from the last surgical procedure. Mean BREAST-Q scores were reported for the overall cohort and by modality for the postoperative period. A linear regression model was applied to all BREAST-Q scores with all predictor factors. RESULTS: In total, 325 patients were enrolled in this study (133 DIEP flap and 192 implant-based reconstructions). The DIEP flap reconstruction group with a previous nipple sparing mastectomy showed the highest scores. Patients with a longer follow-up were less satisfied than the ones with a shorter follow-up, which could be considered as an assessment of the outcome. No significant difference was reported between patients who underwent radiotherapy, chemotherapy or hormone therapy and those who did not. Furthermore, age and BMI had no influence on patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: This study is the first that groups a large number of patients and analyzes predictive factors of long-term satisfaction of patients undergoing breast reconstruction. This can be regarded as a pilot study to raise the awareness of everyone's clinical practice to predict the attitude that patients have after surgery and to prepare them in the best possible way. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com .

Reply to: An Alternative Treatment of Pseudogynecomastia in Male Patients After Massive Weight Loss.

Level of Evidence V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine Ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Midface Lift Plus Lipofilling Preferential in Patients with Negative Lower Eyelid Vectors: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In conducting this study, it was our presumption that lipofilling is a necessary and simultaneous adjunct to lifting the middle third of the face in patients with negative lower eyelid vectors, enabling satisfactory and enduring aesthetic results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients met the following criteria: (1) primary midface lift in subperiosteal plane; (2) negative inferior eyelid vectors at preoperative baseline; (3) postoperative monitoring for ~ 2 years; (4) standard pre- and postoperative photo-documentation; (5) proficiency in Italian language; and (6) signed consent for study participation. Informed consent pertaining to photography allowed for subsequent publication. Pertinent patient data were also collected as follows: age, sex, duration of follow-up, type of surgical procedure, related secondary procedures, quantity of fat injected, nature of incision, and patient satisfaction level. Complete randomness was thus conferred during computer-assisted patient assignment to one of two study arms: midface lift only (group 1) or midface lift plus facial lipofilling as a concurrent operation (group 2). All patients completed Italian versions of the FACE-Q module, which were issued by e-mail approximately 2 years postoperatively. Two plastic surgeons reviewed all postoperative photographs of treated patients and rated outcomes on a scale of 1-5. Statistical analysis was powered by standard software expressing categorical data as numbers and percentages and quantitative data as means ± standard deviations. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and March 2018, a total of 56 patients (women 48; men 8) subjected to primary midface lifts in subperiosteal plane at our Plastic Surgery Department met all criteria for study enrollment. Mean patient age was 56.5 years (range 40-70 years), and the mean follow-up period was 2.1 years (range 2-5 years). Differences in postoperative FACE-Q scoring by the two groups were significant (p < 0.01) across all domains. Outcomes in patients of group 2 remained stable during long-term follow-up, whereas significantly more secondary procedures were pursued by patients of group 1 (p < 0.01). Compared with group 1, the two reviewers encountered significantly greater satisfaction with surgical outcomes among patients of group 2 (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In FACE-Q scoring, those undergoing lift-and-fill procedures reported the highest satisfaction levels. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Correction to: The Role of Skin Thickness in the Choice of a Rhinoplasty Technique for Thin-Skinned Patients: Analysis of Long-Term Results and Patient Satisfaction.

The authors of this article wish to make the following clarification: The FACE-Q is a trademarked patient reported outcome instrument. The "Satisfaction with Nose" scale described and reproduced in this article is similarly trademarked; the copyright is retained by the Q-Portfolio. If readers would like to use the FACE-Q in research or clinical practice, they are directed to www.qportfolio.org to obtain a license permission from the copyright holders. Reproduction of the FACE-Q in publications without prior permission is not permitted.

The Role of Skin Thickness in the Choice of a Rhinoplasty Technique for Thin-Skinned Patients: Analysis of Long-Term Results and Patient Satisfaction.

INTRODUCTION: This randomized controlled study aimed to analyse the long-term results of thin-skinned patients who underwent rhinoplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All the included study patients had the following characteristics: underwent primary rhinoplasty for functional and/or cosmetic problems, were thin-skinned, had been followed for almost 2 years, underwent both standard pre- and post-operative photography, had a good understanding of the Italian language, and had signed a consent form for inclusion in the study. The patients were randomly divided into 4 groups as follows: group 1, camouflage of the dorsum by diced cartilage; group 2, camouflage of the dorsum with lipofilling; group 3, camouflage of the dorsum by a temporal fascia graft; and group 4 (control group), without camouflage of the dorsum. Patients answered the Italian version of the FACE-Q rhinoplasty module. The Obagi skin pinch test was used to measure nasal skin thickness. We compared pre- and post-operative patient satisfaction with the appearance of their nose between the 4 patient groups by the Chi-squared test for unpaired data. Two plastic surgeons reviewed all the post-operative photographs of the study patients and rated the photographs on a scale of 1 to 5. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients who underwent primary rhinoplasty between January 2016 and March 2018 in our department of plastic surgery and satisfied the inclusion criteria were enrolled in this study. The mean patient age was 38.5 years. The mean follow-up time was 2.5 years. The differences between the preoperative and post-operative FACE-Q values for group 1 were significant (P < 0.01), whereas the differences between the preoperative and post-operative FACE-Q values for the other groups were not significant. The results for group 1 patients remained stable over the long-term follow-up compared with the results for other groups (P < 0.01). Groups 2 and 4 underwent more secondary procedures than groups 1 and 3 (P < 0.01). The 2 reviewers determined that patient groups 1 and 3 obtained more satisfactory outcomes than groups 1 and 4 (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This was the first randomized study to demonstrate that diced cartilage grafts used for thin-skinned patients was the best approach for obtaining a satisfactory long-term outcome and durable natural appearance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Role of Spreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: Analysis of Patients Undergoing Correction for Severe Septal Deviation with Long-Term Follow-Up.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this randomized controlled study was to analyze the long-term results of patients undergoing rhinoplasty because of severe septal deviation and to evaluate the stability of results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed with a randomized design. Patients were randomly divided into four groups: group 1, spreader flaps were used in combination with spreader grafts; group 2, spreader flaps were used alone; group 3, spreader grafts were used alone; and group 4, neither spreader flaps nor grafts flaps were used. Patients answered the Italian version of the FACE-Q rhinoplasty module. Anthropometric measurements were performed by AutoCAD for MAC. We determined the angle of deviation, and we compared the pre- and postoperative angles and compared patient satisfaction in the four groups using the Chi-squared test for unpaired data. Two plastic surgeons reviewed all the postoperative photographs of the study patients and rated the photographs on a scale of 1 to 5. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients who underwent primary rhinoplasty between January 2010 and September 2016 satisfied the inclusion criteria and were finally enrolled in this study. Anthropometric measurements revealed statistically significant differences (P < 0.01) between the preoperative and postoperative values for the angle of septal deviation in group 1 versus the other groups. Over the long-term follow-up, group 1 maintained an angle close to 180 degrees (P < 0.01). Group 1 and group 3 were more satisfied compared with groups 2 and 4 (P < 0.01). According to evaluations by the 2 reviewers, group 1 and group 3 were the most satisfactory outcomes (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This was the first randomized study to show that the combined use of the spreader flap and spreader graft is the best choice for a good long-term outcome and durable correction of septal deviation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .