Breast Conserving Therapy for Patients With Prior Cosmetic Implant-Based Breast Augmentation: Outcomes and Comparison Against a Matched Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Controversy exists regarding potential increased toxic effects in patients with cosmetic implant-based augmentation (CIBA) who receive radiation therapy. We evaluated acute and chronic toxic effects associated with radiation therapy in women with prior CIBA treated with whole-breast irradiation (WBI) as part of breast conserving therapy (BCT) and compared these results against a cohort of patients without prior breast augmentation who received similar therapy. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients with a prior history of CIBA who subsequently underwent BCT with WBI. The control group consisted of consecutively treated patients without prior CIBA who also underwent BCT with WBI. Analyses included a comparison of baseline and treatment-associated factors between the augmentation and control groups, evaluation of toxic effects between both groups, and multivariable analysis of factors associated with the receipt of additional surgery following radiation. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with prior CIBA and 135 consecutively treated patients without CIBA were identified. Patients with prior CIBA were treated from 2006 through 2019, and patients without CIBA were treated from 2016 through 2019, though treatment characteristics and median follow-up time were similar between the two groups. Patients with prior CIBA were significantly less likely to experience acute moist desquamation (0% vs. 18%; P = .005). There were otherwise no statistically significant differences in acute (≤ 6 months) or chronic (> 6 months) toxic effects between the two groups. Rates of excellent/good chronic cosmetic outcome were 89% for the CIBA group and 97% in the control group (P = .094). On multivariable analysis, patients without prior CIBA (OR = 0.04; CI = 0.01-0.13; P < .001) and patients treated with moderately hypofractionated irradiation (OR = 0.08; CI = 0.02-0.23; P < .001) were significantly less likely to undergo additional surgery following receipt of WBI. Two patients experienced implant loss following radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: WBI as part of BCT in patients with prior implant-based breast augmentation appears safe and is associated with favorable cosmetic outcomes. There was an increased need for additional surgery in patients with prior CIBA, but rates of acute and chronic toxic effects appeared similar to those in nonaugmented patients.

Craniofacial Microsurgery: An Integrated Approach to Management of Cleft and Craniofacial Syndromes, Surgical Experience, and Insights.

ABSTRACT: Ian Jackson and Jack Fisher published one of the earliest reports on microsurgical applications for craniofacial patients in 1989. Since that time, applications of craniofacial surgery and microsurgery have significantly expanded and become more refined. However, there remain certain specific clinical problems in cleft and craniofacial surgery in which traditional craniofacial methods provide variable success or suboptimal outcomes. The purpose of the current study is to share our experience using an integrated approach of craniofacial and microsurgical methods to provide optimal surgical solutions to this complex patient population. The authors performed a retrospective review of 17 patients that utilized craniofacial microsurgery in setting of cleft and craniofacial syndromes performed by the senior author from July 2013 to July 2020. 22 free flaps were performed for 17 patients. The patient age at time of flap reconstruction ranged from 10 to 48 years (mean 21.4 years). There were 8 females and 9 males. There was one total flap loss. Based on our collective experience, the authors present a comprehensive algorithm for the role of microsurgical reconstruction in cleft and craniofacial patients. There are several situations in craniofacial surgery which traditional reconstructive methods require numerous operative interventions to achieve suitable outcomes. Craniofacial Microsurgery techniques can bring in new tissue and may prevent the need to manipulate scarred and multiply operated tissues. The craniofacial surgery team should not hesitate to apply microsurgical solutions to these situations for optimal results.

Use of Pericranial Flaps with Dermal Substitute for Scalp Reconstruction: A Case Series.

Skin cancer incidence has been rapidly increasing over the past 2 decades, and the resulting defects from excision have significant aesthetic and functional implications. In particular, wound coverage for large scalp and forehead defects with calvarial exposure can lead to hairline distortion, contour irregularities, and alopecia. We describe a 2-stage technique for scalp reconstruction, which preserves the normal hairline, covers exposed bone with vascularized tissue, and restores an aesthetic soft-tissue contour. METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of 13 adults with ages ranging from 50 to 89 years. All patients underwent Mohs surgery on the forehead or scalp between July 2014 and April 2017. Patients underwent a 2-staged reconstruction with an initial pericranial flap and dermal substitute placement followed by the placement of a split-thickness skin graft within 4-6 weeks. RESULTS: Over a 3-year period, 13 patients had successful reconstruction of the scalp defect without alteration of the hairline or contour irregularity. Two patients had minor complications after the first-stage procedure with successful aesthetic reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Full-thickness defects of the scalp and forehead with bone exposure provide a reconstructive challenge for plastic surgeons. Reconstructive algorithms continue to evolve and should be tailored to best suit patients' needs and medial comorbidities. Two-staged reconstruction with local pericranial flap provides a safe and efficacious reconstruction that minimizes hairline distortion, contour irregularity, and donor site morbidity.

Outcome Study after Nasal Alar/Peri-alar Subunit Reconstruction: Comparing Paramedian Forehead Flap to Nasolabial Flap.

OBJECTIVE: Contours of the lower nasal third are unique and present challenges in surgical reconstruction. The nasal alar intricate curved anatomy makes the area easily compromised after Mohs surgery. Managing patient and surgeon expectations with regard to aesthetics and functionality remains the reconstructive goal. The purpose of the study was to compare patients' perspective on aesthetics and functional outcomes of nasal alar reconstruction post Mohs ablative surgery using nasolabial or forehead flaps. METHODS: A single surgeon's results of 23 patients, who underwent nasal alar reconstruction post Mohs surgery, were included for analysis (15 forehead and 8 nasolabial flaps). Initially, 103 consecutive patients undergoing nasal reconstruction were reviewed, with 67 excluded due to nonalar subunit involvement and an additional 13 excluded for other discussed reasons. Mean follow-up period was 2.3 years. Evaluation of a patient satisfaction questionnaire assessed aesthetics and functionality and also surgical scar noticeability. Additionally, 3 board-certified plastic surgeons assessed postoperative images. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients completed the survey. There was no statistically significant difference in gender ratio, follow-up time, or scar noticeability among groups. A difference was noted in both aesthetics and functionality score (P < 0.03) for both variables favoring forehead flaps. Results from the surgeon's questionnaire also confirmed the superiority of forehead flaps concerning scar, alar contour/symmetry, and nostril opening symmetry. CONCLUSIONS: The forehead flap has a better functional and aesthetic outcome and an overall superior level of satisfaction post Mohs ablative surgery.

Reconstructive Approach to an Acquired Absence of Multiple Facial Components: A Case Report.

The subject of our case report is a young girl who was attacked by a raccoon when she was 5 months old. She lost the majority of her nose, her entire right ear, and part of her upper lip. She had previous attempts at reconstructive surgery with poor results. Our collective goals were to provide lifelong reconstruction without the use of synthetic implants and to organize the steps in a way that provided psychological benefit early on while allowing her to continue education and childhood activities with minimal disruptions. We approached the patient's many problems in stages by starting with the most obvious deformity and progressing to the least severe deformity. A radial forearm free flap and a forehead flap with rib cartilage were used in stages for nasal reconstruction. An Abbé flap was utilized for lip reconstruction, and a prelaminated radial forearm free flap with a costal cartilage frame was selected to form a new ear. She had neither lasting complications nor any morbidity from her donor sites. She and her family report a drastic improvement in her self-confidence and in her interactions with her peers. A stepwise approach to reconstruction of acquired absence of multiple facial components achieves the benefit of early positive psychological results with necessary breaks from surgery to allow her normal childhood activities and education. Judicious utilization of free flaps negates the need of synthetic implants for lifelong reconstruction.