Disparity Reduction in United States Breast Reconstruction: An Analysis From 2005-2017 Using 3 Nationwide Data Sets.

BACKGROUND: Following passage of the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act (WHCRA), a steady rise in breast reconstruction rates was reported; however, a recent update is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate longitudinal trends in breast reconstruction (BR) rates in the U.S. and relevant sociodemographic factors. METHODS: Mastectomy cases with/without BR from 2005 through 2017 were abstracted from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program, and National Cancer Database (NCDB). BR rates were examined using Poisson regression. Multivariable logistic regression analysis of NCDB data was used to identify predictors of reconstruction. Race and insurance distributions were evaluated over time. RESULTS: Of 1,554,381 mastectomy patients, 507,631 (32.7%) received BR. Annual reconstruction rates per 1000 mastectomies increased from 2005 to 2012 (NSQIP: Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) 1.077; SEER: 1.090; NCDB: 1.092) and stabilized from 2013 to 2017. NCDB data showed that patients who were younger (≤59 years), privately insured, had fewer comorbidities, and underwent contralateral prophylactic mastectomy were more likely to undergo BR (all p<0.001). Over time, the increase in BR rates was higher among Black (252.3%) and Asian (366.4%) patients than White patients (137.3%). BR rates increased more among Medicaid (418.6%) and Medicare (302.8%) patients than privately insured (125.3%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates stabilization in immediate BR rates over the last decade; reasons behind this stabilization are likely multifactorial. Disparities based on race and insurance type have decreased, with a more equitable distribution of BR rates.

Early Complications in Prepectoral Tissue Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral implant placement for postmastectomy breast reconstruction has increased in recent years. Benefits of prepectoral reconstruction may include lack of animation deformities and reduced postoperative pain, but its complication profile is currently unclear. This study aimed to examine the complication profile of prepectoral tissue expanders (TEs) to determine factors associated with TE loss. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to identify all patients who underwent immediate prepectoral TE reconstruction from January 2018 to June 2021. The decision to use the prepectoral technique was based on mastectomy skin quality and patient comorbidities. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative details were evaluated. Outcomes of interest included TE loss, seroma, hematoma, infection/cellulitis, mastectomy skin flap necrosis requiring revision, and TE exposure. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with TE loss. RESULTS: The study identified 1225 TEs. The most frequent complications were seroma (8.7%, n = 106), infection/cellulitis (8.2%, n = 101), and TE loss (4.2%, n = 51). Factors associated with TE loss in the univariate analysis included ethnicity, history of smoking, body mass index, mastectomy weight, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In the multivariate regression analysis, only mastectomy weight had a positive association with TE loss (odds ratio, 1.001; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Prepectoral two-stage breast reconstruction can be performed safely with an acceptable early complication profile. The study data suggest that increasing mastectomy weight is the most significant factor associated with TE loss. Further research examining the quality of the soft tissue envelope and assessing patient-reported outcomes would prove beneficial.

National Trends in Acellular Dermal Matrix Utilization in Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based reconstruction is the most common method of immediate breast reconstruction in the United States, with acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) playing a significant role in implant support and coverage. This study evaluated recent national trends in ADM use in immediate breast reconstruction and assessed patient characteristics and 30-day complication rates. METHODS: The authors queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for all patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction from 2015 to 2020. Primary outcomes were major surgical and medical complications, as well as ADM use per year. Subset analysis was performed to compare patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction with ADM in 2015 versus 2020. RESULTS: In 39,800 immediate breast reconstructions, ADMs were used in 55.5% of cases ( n = 22,087). ADM usage increased annually from 2015 through 2020. Direct-to-implant reconstruction was significantly associated with ADM use ( P < 0.001). Compared with the no-ADM cohort, there was a significantly increased rate of return to the operating room for any reason ( P < 0.001). When comparing the 2015 and 2020 ADM cohorts, the 2020 ADM cohort had a significantly higher rate of superficial infections. Obesity, smoking history, and insulin-dependent diabetes were independent risk factors for superficial wounds in patients receiving ADM. CONCLUSIONS: ADM use in immediate breast reconstruction increased significantly from 2015 to 2020, likely reflecting national trends in increasing direct-to-implant and prepectoral breast reconstruction. Obesity, smoking history, and insulin-dependent diabetes were independent risk factors for superficial wound infections in the ADM cohort. Patients with ADM had a slight increased incidence of return to the operating room. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.

Early Complications in Prepectoral Breast Reconstructions with and without Acellular Dermal Matrix: A Preliminary Analysis of Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral tissue expander (TE) placement for two-stage postmastectomy reconstruction is usually performed in conjunction with insertion of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). However, the effects of ADM use on TE loss or other early complications remain unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare early postoperative complications in patients who underwent prepectoral breast implant reconstruction with or without ADM use. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients at their institution who underwent prepectoral breast reconstruction from January of 2018 to June of 2021. The primary outcome was TE loss within 90 days of surgery; secondary outcomes included other complications such as infection, TE exposure, mastectomy skin flap necrosis requiring revision, and seroma. RESULTS: Data on 714 patients with 1225 TEs (1060 with ADM and 165 without) were analyzed. Baseline demographics did not differ by ADM use, although mastectomy breast tissue weight was higher in patients without ADM (750.3 g versus 540.8 g; P < 0.001). Rates of TE loss were similar in reconstructions with (3.8%) ADM and without (6.7%; P = 0.09). We also did not find differences in the rates of secondary outcomes between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: ADM use had no statistically significant effect on early complication rates among patients undergoing breast reconstruction with prepectoral TEs. Still, this study was underpowered, and data trended toward statistical significance; thus, larger studies are required in the future. Additional research and randomized studies should focus on larger cohorts and examine long-term complications such as capsular contracture and implant malposition. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Textured versus Smooth Tissue Expanders: A Comparison of Complications in 3526 Breast Reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: Increased understanding of breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma has led to a shift away from textured breast devices. A few small studies have compared the complication rates of textured and smooth tissue expanders (TEs). The aim of this study was to compare complication profiles in patients undergoing two-stage postmastectomy breast reconstruction with either textured or smooth TEs. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective review of female patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with textured or smooth TEs from 2018 to 2020 at their institution. Rates of seroma, infection/cellulitis, malposition/rotation, exposure, and TE loss were analyzed in the overall cohort and subgroups undergoing prepectoral and subpectoral TE placement. A propensity score-matched analysis was used to decrease the effects of confounders comparing textured and smooth TEs. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 3526 TEs (1456 textured and 2070 smooth). More frequent use of acellular dermal matrix, SPY angiography, and prepectoral TE placement was noted in the smooth TE cohort ( P < 0.001). Univariate analysis suggested higher rates of infection/cellulitis, malposition/rotation, and exposure in smooth TEs (all P < 0.01). Rates of TE loss did not differ. After propensity matching, no differences were noted in infection or TE loss. Prepectoral smooth expanders had increased rates of malposition/rotation. CONCLUSIONS: TE surface type did not affect rates of TE loss, although increased rates of expander malposition were noted in the smooth prepectoral cohort. Further research is needed to examine breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma risk with temporary textured TE exposure to improve decision-making. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCW: Therapeutic, III.

Association of High-Deductible Health Plans and Time to Surgery for Breast and Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) have been shown to delay timing of breast and colon cancer screening, although the relationship to the timing of cancer surgery is unknown. The objective of this study was to characterize timing of surgery for breast and colon cancer patients undergoing cancer operations following routine screening. STUDY DESIGN: Data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims Database from 2007 to 2016 were queried to identify patients who underwent screening mammogram and/or colonoscopy. The calendar quarters of screening and surgery were analyzed with ordinal logistic regression. The time from screening to surgery (time to surgery, TTS) was evaluated using a Cox proportional hazard function. RESULTS: Among 32,562,751 patients who had screening mammograms, 0.7% underwent breast cancer surgery within the following year. Among 9,325,238 patients who had screening colonoscopies, 0.9% were followed by colon cancer surgery within a year. The odds of screening (OR 1.146 for mammogram, 1.272 for colonoscopy; p < 0.001) and surgery (OR 1.120 for breast surgery, 1.219 for colon surgery; p < 0.001) increased each quarter for HDHPs compared to low-deductible health plans. Enrollment in an HDHP was not associated with a difference in TTS. Screening in Q3 or Q4 was associated with shorter TTS compared to screening in Q1 (hazard ratio 1.061 and 1.046, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: HDHPs were associated with delays in screening and surgery. However, HDHPs were not associated with delays in TTS. Interventions to improve cancer care outcomes in the HDHP population should concentrate on reducing barriers to timely screening.

A Cohort Analysis of Early Outcomes After AlloDerm, FlexHD, and SurgiMend Use in Two-Stage Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is frequently utilized in prepectoral breast reconstruction, but few studies have examined the role of ADM type in complication risk. OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to determine the impact of ADM type on early complication rates in 2-stage alloplastic prepectoral breast reconstruction. METHODS: We performed a cohort examination of all patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate 2-stage alloplastic prepectoral breast reconstruction with ADM support at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2018 to 2021. ADM types utilized included AlloDerm (LifeCell Corporation, Branchburg, NJ), FlexHD (MTF Biologics, Edison, NJ), and SurgiMend (Integra LifeSciences Corporation, Princeton, NJ). Complication rates based on the number of tissue expanders (TEs) were determined for each ADM type. Performance of multivariate logistic regression determined the impact of ADM type on complication risk after accounting for confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 726 patients (1054 TEs: 194 AlloDerm, 93 FlexHD, 767 SurgiMend) were included. The 3 cohorts differed in terms of mastectomy type (nipple-sparing: 23.5% of AlloDerm, 33.3% of FlexHD, 19.1% of SurgiMend, P = .038); ADM perforation (perforated: 94.8% of AlloDerm, 98.2% of FlexHD, 100% of SurgiMend, P < .001); and ADM size (AlloDerm: 153.2 cm2 [37.6], SurgiMend: 198.7 cm2 [10.4], FlexHD: 223.7 cm2 [37.9], P < .001). On univariate examination, no differences existed between ADM types for seroma, infection, exposure, malposition, or TE loss. Additionally, after adjustment for confounders with multivariate regression, no ADM type had higher odds of TE loss. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of prepectoral reconstruction patients, ADM type did not significantly affect the risk of complications. Additional prospective studies are warranted to better evaluate ADM choice for prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Surgical Management of Textured Breast Implants: Assessing Risk and Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Textured implants have been linked to breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. Patients who undergo explantation have options for reconstruction, but data on safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is limited. The purpose of this study was to classify complications and PROs in patients opting for surgical management of textured implants. METHODS: Complication rates and BREAST-Q scores were compared between (i) asymptomatic patients who underwent conversion from textured to smooth implants (n=224), (ii) symptomatic patients who underwent conversion from textured to smooth implants (n=83), (iii) patients who underwent explantation without replacement (n=44), and (iv) patients who underwent replacement with autologous reconstruction (n=33). Linear regression examined PROs controlling for clinical and surgical variables. RESULTS: Overall complication rates in 384 patients (637 implants) differed across groups (p=0.034) with the highest rate (25%) in patients who underwent explantation without replacement. These patients were specifically more impacted by minor complications, notably seroma. Capsulectomy extent did not significantly impact complications. Asymptomatic and symptomatic smooth implant patients had improvements in satisfaction with breasts (<0.05). Autologous reconstruction patients had significant improvements in satisfaction with breasts sustained after 3 months postoperative (p<0.01) and sexual well-being sustained after 6-months postoperative (p<0.05). Patients who underwent removal without replacement had lower physical well-being of the chest scores at ≥1 year than the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Replacement of textured implants with smooth implants or flaps is safe and is associated with improved satisfaction with breasts and quality of life. The degree of capsulectomy does not appear to impact the incidence of perioperative complications.

Plastic surgery market share of breast reconstructive procedures: An analysis of two nationwide databases.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Given advances that streamline breast reconstruction (e.g., prepectoral placement, acellular dermal matrix [ADM], oncoplastic surgery), there is concern that nonplastic surgeons are performing a growing proportion of breast reconstructive procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate US trends in the market share of breast reconstruction performed by plastic compared to general surgeons. METHODS: IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Claims 2006-2017 and NSQIP 2005-2020 were queried to identify women who underwent mastectomy with alloplastic (tissue expander or implant-based) or free flap reconstruction, or lumpectomy with oncoplastic reconstruction (breast reduction, mastopexy, or local/regional flap). MarketScan included immediate and delayed reconstructions, while all NSQIP reconstructions were immediate. Poisson regression with incident rate ratios (IRRs) modeled trends in surgeon type over time. RESULTS: The cohort included 65 168 encounters from MarketScan and 73 351 from NSQIP. Plastic surgeons performed 95.8% of free flap, 93.8% of alloplastic, and 64.9% of oncoplastic reconstructions. Plastic surgeons performed an increasing proportion of immediate oncoplastic reduction and mastopexy (MarketScan IRR: 1.077, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.060-1.094, p < 0.001; NSQIP IRR: 1.041, 95% CI: 1.030-1.052, p < 0.001). There were no clinically significant trends for delayed oncoplastic, alloplastic, or free flap reconstructions. Plastic surgeons were more likely to use ADM compared to general surgeons in NSQIP (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Plastic surgeons gained market share in immediate oncoplastic breast reduction and mastopexy over the past two decades without any loss in alloplastic or free flap breast reconstruction. Plastic surgeons should continue collaboration with breast surgical oncologists to reinforce the shared surgeon model for management of breast cancer.

Decreasing length of stay in breast reconstruction patients: A national analysis of 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: The effects of COVID-19 on breast reconstruction included shifts toward alloplastic reconstruction methods to preserve hospital resources and minimize COVID exposures. We examined the effects of COVID-19 on breast reconstruction hospital length of stay (LOS) and subsequent early postoperative complication rates. METHODS: Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, we examined female patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction from 2019 to 2020. We compared postoperative complications across 2019-2020 for alloplastic and autologous reconstruction patients. We further performed subanalysis of 2020 patients based on LOS. RESULTS: Both alloplastic and autologous reconstruction patients had shorter inpatient stays. Regarding the alloplastic 2019 versus 2020 cohorts, complication rates did not differ (p > 0.05 in all cases). Alloplastic patients in 2020 with longer LOS had more unplanned reoperations (p < 0.001). Regarding autologous patients in 2019 versus 2020, the only complication increasing from 2019 to 2020 was deep surgical site infection (SSI) (2.0% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.024). Autologous patients in 2020 with longer LOS had more unplanned reoperations (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: In 2020, hospital LOS decreased for all breast reconstruction patients with no complication differences in alloplastic patients and a slight increase in SSIs in autologous patients. Shorter LOS may lead to improved satisfaction and lower healthcare costs with low complication risk, and future research should examine the potential relationship between LOS and these outcomes.

Three-Dimensional Surface Analysis for Preoperative Prediction of Breast Volume: A Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined whether preoperative three-dimensional surface imaging can accurately predict breast volume. Reliably predicting breast volume preoperatively can assist with breast reconstruction planning, patient education, and perioperative risk stratification. METHODS: The authors conducted a review of patients who underwent mastectomy from 2020 to 2021 and included all patients who had preoperative VECTRA XT three-dimensional imaging. VECTRA Analysis Module (VAM) and VECTRA Body Sculptor (VBS) were used for volumetric analysis using standard anatomical breast borders. Breast weights were obtained intraoperatively. Predictive accuracy was defined as VAM estimates ±10% of mastectomy specimen weight or ±100 g of mastectomy weight. RESULTS: The study included 179 patients (266 breasts). There was no significant difference ( P = 0.22) between mean mastectomy weight of 620.8 ± 360.3 g and mean VAM estimate of 609.5 ± 361.9 g. Mean VBS estimate was 498.9 ± 337.6 g, which differed from mean mastectomy weight ( P < 0.001). When defining predictive accuracy as ±100 g, 58.7% of VAM and 44.4% of VBS estimates were accurate. Body mass index, body surface area, and ptosis grade significantly affected VAM and VBS breast volume predictions. CONCLUSIONS: VAM is more accurate at predicting mastectomy weight than VBS, likely because of VAM's analysis of surface topography rather than discrete surface landmarks. Discrepancies between VECTRA estimates and mastectomy weight were likely attributable to differences between surgical mastectomy borders and breast borders used in volumetric analysis. Surgeons should consider the physical characteristics of patients when using three-dimensional imaging. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, I.

Air versus Saline in Initial Prepectoral Tissue Expansion: A Comparison of Complications and Perioperative Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: One option to optimize prepectoral tissue expander fill volume while minimizing stress on mastectomy skin flaps is to use air as an initial fill medium, with subsequent exchange to saline during postoperative expansion. The authors compared complications and early patient-reported outcomes (PROs) based on fill type in prepectoral breast reconstruction patients. METHODS: Prepectoral breast reconstruction patients who underwent intraoperative tissue expansion with air or saline from 2018 to 2020 were reviewed to assess fill-type utilization. The primary endpoint was expander loss; secondary endpoints included seroma, hematoma, infection/cellulitis, full-thickness mastectomy skin flap necrosis requiring revision, expander exposure, and capsular contracture. PROs were assessed with the BREAST-Q Physical Well-Being of the Chest scale 2 weeks postoperatively. Propensity-matching was performed as a secondary analysis. RESULTS: Of 560 patients (928 expanders) included in the analysis, 372 had devices initially filled with air (623 expanders), and 188 with saline (305 expanders). No differences were observed for overall rates of expander loss (4.7% versus 3.0%, P = 0.290) or overall complications (22.5% versus 17.7%, P = 0.103). No difference in BREAST-Q scores was observed ( P = 0.142). Utilization of air-filled expanders decreased substantially over the last study year. After propensity matching, no differences in loss, other complications, or PROs were observed across cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Tissue expanders initially filled with air seem to have no significant advantage over saline-filled expanders in maintaining mastectomy skin flap viability or PROs, including after propensity matching. These findings can help guide choice of initial tissue expander fill type. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Increasing rates of general anesthesia use in lumpectomy procedures: A 15-year trends analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesia methods in oncologic breast surgery have evolved with less invasive practices. The aims of this study were primarily to examine trends in anesthesia type used during lumpectomy. METHODS: We analyzed lumpectomy procedures from 2005 to 2019 using the NSQIP database. Upon defining the nadir in general anesthesia (GA) and peak in monitored anesthesia care (MAC) use as 2007, we compared patient characteristics and complications in the 2007 versus 2019 GA and MAC cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine associations with receipt of GA. RESULTS: Of 253 545 lumpectomy patients, 191 773 (75.6%) received GA and 61 772 (24.4%) received MAC. From 2005 to 2019, GA rates increased from 66.7% to 82.5%, while MAC rates decreased from 33.3% to 17.5%. More GA patients were obese and American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3. Over time, age and body mass index (BMI) increased in both GA and MAC cohorts. Odds of receiving GA increased over time, and predictors included concurrent axillary lymph node dissection (p < 0.0001) or sentinel lymph node biopsy (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate increasing use of GA over time for lumpectomy, which may be related to aging lumpectomy patient population with higher BMIs. We also find a strong association between use of GA and concurrent lymph node procedures.

Risk of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma in Patients with Textured Tissue Expanders.

BACKGROUND: The association between textured implants and breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is well established, but the risk of BIA-ALCL in patients with transient exposure to a textured tissue expander (TE) is not as well documented. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and risk of BIA-ALCL in patients with temporary exposure to a textured TE with subsequent smooth implant placement. METHODS: This single-institution retrospective cohort study included all female patients who underwent two-stage breast reconstruction with placement of a textured TE from 1995 to 2016 with subsequent exchange to a smooth permanent implant. Primary outcome of interest was development of BIA-ALCL. Patients with exposure to textured implants were excluded. Follow-up was determined by last documented visit. The authors calculated summary statistics for exposure time and follow-up intervals. RESULTS: Overall, 3310 patients had temporary exposure to a textured TE with exchange to a smooth implant, totaling 5201 textured TEs. Average textured TE exposure time was 6.7 months (median, 5.8 months). Average follow-up was 6.8 years (median, 6.3 years), ranging from 3.7 months to 18 years. No cases of BIA-ALCL were identified. CONCLUSIONS: As no cases of BIA-ALCL were identified, the risk of BIA-ALCL with short exposure to textured TEs is likely lower than the risk from exposure to permanent textured implants. Although longer follow-up is needed, these results can help counsel patients with previous exposure to textured TEs who are concerned about their risk of BIA-ALCL and can contribute to discussions on potential continued utility of textured TEs. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, IV.

Breast Surgical Oncology Epidemiologic Research: A Guide and Comparison of Four National Databases.

BACKGROUND: National databases are a rich source of epidemiologic data for breast surgical oncology research. However, these databases differ in the demographic, surgical, and oncologic variables provided. This study aimed to compare the strengths and limitations of four national databases in the context of breast surgical oncology research. METHODS: The study comprised a descriptive analysis of four national databases (the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program [NSQIP], the Nationwide Inpatient Sample [NIS], the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results [SEER] program, and the National Cancer Database [NCDB]) to assess their strengths and limitations in the context of breast surgical oncology. The study assessed the data available in each database for female patients with a breast cancer diagnosis between 2007 and 2017, and compared patient age, ethnicity, and race distributions. RESULTS: Data from 3.9 million female patients were examined, with most patients being between 60 and 69 years of age, non-Hispanic, and white. Age, ethnicity, and race distributions were similar in the databases. The NSQIP includes data on operative details, comorbidities, and postoperative outcomes. The NIS provides health services and inpatient utilization information, but does not evaluate outpatient procedures. The SEER program provides population-based oncologic detail including stage, histology, and neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment. The NCDB offers hospital-based oncologic information and the largest population in the study period, with approximately 2.5 million breast cancer patients. CONCLUSION: Epidemiologic datasets offer tremendous potential for the examination of oncologic breast surgery, with each database providing unique data useful for addressing different epidemiologic questions. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each database creates a more efficient and productive research environment.

Analysis of a Trend Reversal in US Lumpectomy Rates From 2005 Through 2017 Using 3 Nationwide Data Sets.

Importance: Rates of lumpectomy for breast cancer management in the United States previously declined in favor of more aggressive surgical options, such as mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). Objective: To evaluate longitudinal trends in the rates of lumpectomy and mastectomy, including unilateral mastectomy vs CPM rates, and to determine characteristics associated with current surgical practice using 3 national data sets. Design and Setting: Data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program, and National Cancer Database (NCDB) were examined to evaluate trends in lumpectomy and mastectomy rates from 2005 through 2017. Mastectomy rates were also evaluated with a focus on CPM. Longitudinal trends were analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage test for trend. Multivariate logistic regression models were performed on the NCDB data set to identify predictors of lumpectomy and CPM. Results: A study sample of 3 467 645 female surgical breast cancer patients was analyzed. Lumpectomy rates reached a nadir between 2010 and 2013, with a significant increase thereafter. Conversely, in comparison with lumpectomy rates, overall mastectomy rates declined significantly starting in 2013. Cochran-Armitage trend tests demonstrated an annual decrease in lumpectomy rates of 1.31% (95% CI, 1.30%-1.32%), 0.07% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.12%), and 0.15% (95% CI, 0.15%-0.16%) for NSQIP, SEER, and NCDB, respectively, from 2005 to 2013 (P < .001, P = .01, and P < .001, respectively). From 2013 to 2017, the annual increase in lumpectomy rates was 0.96% (95% CI, 0.95%-0.98%), 1.60% (95% CI, 1.59%-1.62%), and 1.66% (95% CI, 1.65%-1.67%) for NSQIP, SEER, and NCDB, respectively (all P < .001). Comparisons of specific mastectomy types showed that unilateral mastectomy and CPM rates stabilized after 2013, with unilateral mastectomy rates remaining higher than CPM rates throughout the entire time period. Conclusions: This observational longitudinal analysis indicated a trend reversal with an increase in lumpectomy rates since 2013 and an associated decline in mastectomies. The steady increase in CPM rates from 2005 to 2013 has since stabilized. The reasons for the recent reversal in trends are likely multifactorial. Further qualitative and quantitative research is required to understand the factors driving these recent practice changes and their associations with patient-reported outcomes.

Effects of COVID-19 on mastectomy and breast reconstruction rates: A national surgical sample.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted breast cancer treatment in 2020. Guidelines initially halted elective procedures, subsequently encouraging less invasive surgeries and restricting breast reconstruction options. We examined the effects of COVID-19 on oncologic breast surgery and reconstruction rates during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, we performed an observational examination of female surgical breast cancer patients from 2017 to 2020. We analyzed annual rates of lumpectomy, mastectomy (unilateral/contralateral prophylactic/bilateral prophylactic), and breast reconstruction (alloplastic/autologous) and compared 2019 and 2020 reconstruction cohorts to evaluate the effect of COVID-19. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2020, 175 949 patients underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without reconstruction. From 2019 to 2020, patient volume declined by 10.7%, unilateral mastectomy rates increased (70.5% to 71.9%, p = 0.003), and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates decreased. While overall reconstruction rates were unchanged, tissue expander reconstruction increased (64.0% to 68.4%, p < 0.001) and direct-to-implant and autologous reconstruction decreased. Outpatient alloplastic reconstruction increased (65.7% to 73.8%, p < 0.0001), and length of hospital stay decreased for all reconstruction patients (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In 2020, there was a nearly 11% decline in breast cancer surgeries, comparable mastectomy and reconstruction rates, increased use of outpatient alloplastic reconstruction, and significantly reduced in-hospital time across all reconstruction types.

Propensity Scoring in Plastic Surgery Research: An Analysis and Best Practice Guide.

Randomized controlled trials, though considered the gold standard in clinical research, are often not feasible in plastic surgery research. Instead, researchers rely heavily on observational studies, leading to potential issues with confounding and selection bias. Propensity scoring-a statistical technique that estimates a patient's likelihood of having received the exposure of interest-can improve the comparability of study groups by either guiding the selection of study participants or generating a covariate that can be adjusted for in multivariate analyses. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive review of research articles published in three major plastic surgery journals (Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive, & Aesthetic Surgery, and Annals of Plastic Surgery) to determine the utilization of propensity scoring methods in plastic surgery research from August 2018 to August 2020. We found that propensity scoring was used in only eight (0.8%) of 971 research articles, none of which fully reported all components of their propensity scoring methodology. We provide a brief overview of propensity score techniques and recommend guidelines for accurate reporting of propensity scoring methods for plastic surgery research. Improved understanding of propensity scoring may encourage plastic surgery researchers to incorporate the method in their own work and improve plastic surgeons' ability to understand and analyze future research studies that utilize propensity score methods.

Noninvasive Systemic Modalities for Prevention of Head and Neck Radiation-Associated Soft Tissue Injury: A Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Radiation-associated soft tissue injury is a potentially devastating complication for head and neck cancer patients. The damage can range from minor sequelae such as xerostomia, which requires frequent daily maintenance, to destructive degenerative processes such as osteoradionecrosis, which can contribute to flap failure and delay or reverse oral rehabilitation. Despite the need for effective radioprotectants, the literature remains sparse, primarily focused on interventions beyond the surgeon's control, such as maintenance of good oral hygiene or modulation of radiation dose. METHODS: This narrative review aggregates and explores noninvasive, systemic treatment modalities for prevention or amelioration of radiation-associated soft tissue injury. RESULTS: We highlighted nine modalities with the most clinical potential, which include amifostine, melatonin, palifermin, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, photobiomodulation, pentoxifylline-tocopherol-clodronate, pravastatin, transforming growth factor-ß modulators, and deferoxamine, and reviewed the benefits and limitations of each modality. Unfortunately, none of these modalities are supported by strong evidence for prophylaxis against radiation-associated soft tissue injury. CONCLUSION: While we cannot endorse any of these nine modalities for immediate clinical use, they may prove fruitful areas for further investigation.