Adjusting models to better predict obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS) in forceps-assisted vaginal deliveries: A retrospective cross-sectional trial.

OBJECTIVE: Obesity and maternal age are increasing among pregnant patients. The understood effect of body mass index (BMI), advanced maternal age (AMA), and second stage of labor on obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS) at delivery is varied. The objective of this study was to assess whether incorporating BMI, second stage of labor length, and AMA into a model for predicting OASIS among forceps-assisted vaginal deliveries (FAVD) had a higher predictivity value compared to models without these additions. METHOD: This was an IRB-approved retrospective cohort study of singleton gestations who underwent a FAVD between 2017 and 2021. The primary outcome was prediction of OASIS via established models versus models including the addition of new predictive factors. RESULTS: A total of 979 patients met inclusionary criteria and were included in the final analysis. 20.4% of patients had an OASIS laceration, 11.3% of neonates had NICU admissions, 23.7% had a composite all neonatal outcome, and 8% had a composite subgaleal/cephalohematoma outcome. Comparisons of known factors that predict OASIS (nulliparity, race, episiotomy status) to known factors with additional predictors (BMI, AMA, and length of second stage in labor) were explored. After comparing each model's AUC to one another (a total of 3 comparisons made), there was no statistically significant difference between the models (all P > 0.62). CONCLUSION: Including BMI, AMA, and second stage of labor length does not improve the predictivity of OASIS in patients with successful FAVD. These factors should not impact a provider's decision to perform a FAVD when solely considering increased odds of OASIS.

Outcomes After Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Following the National Institution of a Ban on Bacitracin Irrigation.

BACKGROUND: The use of irrigation with bacitracin-containing solution is common among surgeons, as it was widely thought to have antibacterial properties and prevent postoperative infection. Current literature, however, suggests that antibiotic-containing irrigation confers little added benefit. On January 31, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration instituted a ban on bacitracin-containing irrigation for operative use. This study aimed to determine whether bacitracin has a beneficial effect on postoperative infection rates by analyzing infection rates before and after the Food and Drug Administration ban on bacitracin irrigation. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective chart review was conducted. Eligible patients underwent implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy from October 1, 2016, to July 31, 2022. Procedure date, reconstruction type, patient comorbidities, use of bacitracin irrigation, postoperative infection, and secondary outcomes were collected. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 188 female patients were included in the study. Bacitracin use did not protect against infection in univariate or multivariable analysis. Age greater than 50 years was associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection ( P = 0.0366). The presence of comorbidities, smoker status, neoadjuvant therapy treatment before surgery, implant placement, and laterality were all not significantly associated with postoperative infection development. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate a lack of association between bacitracin use and postoperative infection. Additional research into the optimal antibiotic for perioperative irrigation is needed, as bacitracin is not encouraged for use.

Paper Tape May Improve Scar Aesthetics and Prevent Wound Closure Complications.

There is uncertainty whether postoperative application of paper tape (PT) improves scar aesthetics and reduces wound closure complications. This study aimed to review and assess the quality of applicable findings from studies investigating PT's efficacy. We queried PubMed and SCOPUS using the search terms "(("paper tape") AND (wound OR closure OR heal* OR complication OR skin OR prevent* OR scar*))." We excluded articles that were duplicates, basic science, or not clinically relevant. We assessed the level of evidence for each article using the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) Rating Levels of Evidence and Grading Recommendations for Therapeutic Studies, ranging from I (highest) to V (lowest). Of 186 publications reviewed, we included eight studies in the literature review. Five of these studies reported statistically significant positive outcomes on scar aesthetics and wound closure associated with using PT. Using the ASPS rating system, we found that two studies were Level I, three studies were Level II, two studies were Level IV, and one study was Level V. Notably, heterogeneity in the study designs limited outcome comparison. The data from the studies included in this literature review support using PT to optimize scar and wound management. The lack of higher levels of evidence, however, suggests the need for additional randomized controlled trials to rigorously evaluate patient outcomes when using PT compared with other forms of adhesive dressings.