Direct Subscarpal Lipectomy Combined With Liposuction in Abdominoplasty: An Analysis of Safety and Efficacy in 200 Consecutive Patients.

BACKGROUND: Abdominoplasty procedures continue to evolve because combining techniques such as suction-assisted lipectomy or direct subscarpal lipectomy have proven to be powerful adjuncts to achieve optimal aesthetic results. However, concern has been expressed about combining techniques simultaneously given the potential to damage the vascularity of the abdominoplasty flap. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of simultaneous direct subscarpal lipectomy combined with liposuction in abdominoplasty patients. METHODS: A 4-year retrospective review of consecutive abdominoplasties (n = 200) performed by a single surgeon was conducted. Liposuction of the abdominal flap and flanks was performed in all patients. After raising the abdominoplasty flap, undermining was performed to just beyond the xyphoid, the lower rib margins superiorly, and the anterior axillary line laterally. Fat deep to Scarpa's fascia was then removed by direct tangential excision in all zones of the abdominal flap. RESULTS: The patients had a mean age of 42.19 years and BMI of 28.10 kg/m2; the mean follow-up time was 7 months. Seroma occurred in 13 patients (6.5%), superficial wound dehiscence treated with local wound care in 16 patients (8%), hypertrophic scarring in 16 patients (8%), partial umbilical necrosis in 1 patient (0.5%), and partial umbilical epidermolysis in 6 patients (3%). No patients experienced major or minor full-thickness tissue loss. No patients needed reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous direct excision of subscarpal fat with liposuction of the abdomen and flanks does not appear to subject any zone of the abdominoplasty flap to increased risks of vascular compromise. No flap necroses were observed. The technique described is safe and may provide superior abdominoplasty results.

Management of Superficial and Deep Peroneal Nerve Neuromas with Targeted Muscle Reinnervation in Nonamputees: Operative Technique and Early Outcomes.

Background: Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR), a surgical technique developed by the senior authors that coapts proximal ends of nerves to distal motor nerves of adjacent muscles, has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment and prevention of neuroma pain. The objective of this study is to describe the surgical technique for TMR of the superficial peroneal nerve (SPN) and deep peroneal nerve (DPN) in nonamputee patients and provide data on postoperative functional outcomes. Methods: A single-institution retrospective chart review was performed between March 2018 and April 2021. Patients were de-identified and included if they were nonamputees receiving TMR for pain in the peroneal nerve distribution. Data extracted included demographic information, symptoms before operation, relevant nerve coaptation, peri-, and postoperative complications, and long-term functional outcomes. Results: Of the 19 patients reviewed, 11 patients underwent TMR of the SPN alone: eight had complete resolution of their symptoms; two indicated partial improvement in pain; and one patient had no improvement. Four patients underwent TMR of the DPN alone: two patients had complete resolution of their pain, and two patients had partial improvement with pain. Four patients underwent TMR of both the SPN/DPN: two patients had complete resolution of their symptoms, and two patients were noted to have significant improvement but had persistent pain from prior foot operations. Average follow-up time was 260 days. Conclusions: TMR is a successful technique in the management of SPN and DPN neuroma pain. Our technique revealed excellent clinical outcomes, no procedure-specific complications, and improved subjective pain reports.

Do Absorbable Sutures Work for Rectus Diastasis Repair in Abdominoplasty Patients?

Background: The standard treatment for rectus diastasis is rectus sheath plication during abdominoplasty. Lasting correction of diastasis is essential, but there is currently a debate as to whether absorbable or nonabsorbable rectus plication achieves a lower rate of recurrence. Objectives: The goal of this study is to assess long-term patient outcomes and the recurrence of rectus diastasis after plication with long-lasting absorbable sutures. Methods: A retrospective study of abdominoplasties performed by the senior author between 2018 and 2022 was performed. Only female patients with >6 months of follow-up were included. Plication of the rectus muscles was performed with a combination of interrupted, buried, figure of eight #0 polydioxanone suture and running #0 Maxon (Covidien, Mansfield, MA). Outcomes were assessed by physical examination at postoperative visits. A retrospective chart review was used to obtain demographic and perioperative information. Results: Seventy-one patients underwent abdominoplasty with an average follow-up of 21.1 months. The average age was 43 years, and the average BMI was 27 kg/m2. Correction of rectus diastasis was performed using absorbable sutures in all patients with no recurrence of diastasis in any patient (0% diastasis recurrence rate). Complications included delayed wound healing (11%), seroma (8.5%), hematoma (2.8%), and deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (2.8%). No patients needed reoperation. Conclusions: Abdominal wall plication using a double-layered, long-lasting absorbable suture closure is a safe, reliable, and effective method to address rectus diastasis during abdominoplasty. Our technique achieved no recurrence of diastasis in any patient and a low complication profile.

Warfarin, not direct oral anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy, is associated with increased bleeding risk in emergency general surgery patients: Implications in this new era of novel anticoagulants: An EAST multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess perioperative bleeding complications and in-hospital mortality in patients requiring emergency general surgery presenting with a history of antiplatelet (AP) versus direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) versus warfarin use. METHODS: A prospective observational study across 21 centers between 2019 and 2022 was conducted. Inclusion criteria were age 18 years or older, and DOAC, warfarin, or AP use within 24 hours of an emergency general surgery procedure. Outcomes included perioperative bleeding and in-hospital mortality. The study was conducted using analysis of variance, χ 2 , and multivariable regression models. RESULTS: Of the 413 patients, 221 (53.5%) reported AP use, 152 (36.8%) DOAC use, and 40 (9.7%) warfarin use. The most common indications for surgery were obstruction (23% [AP], 45% [DOAC], and 28% [warfarin]), intestinal ischemia (13%, 17%, and 23%), and diverticulitis/peptic ulcers (7%, 7%, and 15%). Compared with DOAC use, warfarin use was associated with significantly higher perioperative bleeding complication (odds ratio [OR], 4.4 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.0-9.9]). There was no significant difference in perioperative bleeding complication between DOAC and AP use (OR, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.4-1.1]). Compared with DOAC use, there was no significant difference in mortality between warfarin use (OR, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.2-2.5]) or AP use (OR, 0.5 [95% CI, 0.2-1.2]). After adjusting for confounders, warfarin use (OR, 6.3 [95% CI, 2.8-13.9]), medical history, and operative indication were associated with an increase in perioperative bleeding complications. However, warfarin was not independently associated with risk of mortality (OR, 1.3 [95% CI, 0.39-4.7]), whereas intraoperative vasopressor use (OR, 4.7 [95% CI, 1.7-12.8]), medical history, and postoperative bleeding (OR, 5.5 [95% CI, 2.4-12.8]) were. CONCLUSION: Despite ongoing concerns about the increase in DOAC use and lack of readily available reversal agents, this study suggests that warfarin, rather than DOACs, is associated with higher perioperative bleeding complications. However, that risk does not result in an increase in mortality, suggesting that perioperative decisions should be dictated by patient disease and comorbidities rather than type of AP or anticoagulant use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.