Soft Tissue Reconstruction After Sacral Neoplasm Resection: The University of California San Francisco Experience.

PURPOSE: Resection of sacral neoplasms such as chordoma and chondrosarcoma with subsequent reconstruction of large soft tissue defects is a complex multidisciplinary process. Radiotherapy and prior abdominal surgery play a role in reconstructive planning; however, there is no consensus on how to maximize outcomes. In this study, we present our institution's experience with the reconstructive surgical management of this unique patient population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent reconstruction after resection of primary or recurrent pelvic chordoma or chondrosarcoma between 2002 and 2019. Surgical details, hospital stay, and postoperative outcomes were assessed. Patients were divided into 3 groups for comparison based on reconstruction technique: gluteal-based flaps, vertical rectus abdominus myocutaneous (VRAM) flaps, and locoregional fasciocutaneous flaps. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients (17 males, 11 females), with mean age of 62 years (range, 34-86 years), were reviewed. Twenty-two patients (78.6%) received gluteal-based flaps, 3 patients (10.7%) received VRAM flaps, and 3 patients (10.7%) were reconstructed with locoregional fasciocutaneous flaps. Patients in the VRAM group were significantly more likely to have undergone total sacrectomy (P < 0.01) in a 2-stage operation (P < 0.01) compared with patients in the other 2 groups. Patients in the VRAM group also had a significantly greater average number of reoperations (2 ± 3.5, P = 0.04) and length of stay (29.7 ± 20.4 days, P = 0.01) compared with the 2 other groups. The overall minor and major wound complication rates were 17.9% and 42.9%, respectively, with 17.9% of patients experiencing at least 1 infection or seroma. There was no association between prior abdominal surgery, surgical stages, or radiation therapy and an increased risk of wound complications. CONCLUSIONS: Vertical rectus abdominus myocutaneous flaps are a more suitable option for patients with larger defects after total sacrectomy via 2-staged anteroposterior resections, whereas gluteal myocutaneous flaps are effective options for posterior-only resections. For patients with small- to moderate-sized defects, local fasciocutaneous flaps are a less invasive and effective option. Paraspinous flaps may be used in combination with other techniques to provide additional bulk and coverage for especially long postresection wounds. Furthermore, mesh is a useful adjunct for any reconstruction aimed at protecting against intra-abdominal complications.

The Utility of Prevena Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Groin Incisions for Critical Limb-Threatening Ischemia: A Single Institution Experience.

BACKGROUND: Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) is an adjunctive treatment that uses constant negative pressure suction to facilitate healing. The utility of this treatment modality on vascular operations for critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) has yet to be elucidated. This study compares the incidence of postoperative wound complications between the Prevena Incision Management System, a type of iNPWT, and standard wound dressings for vascular patients who also underwent plastic surgery closure of groin incisions for CLTI. METHOD: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 40 patients with CLTI who underwent 53 open vascular surgeries with subsequent sartorius muscle flap closure. Patient demographics, intraoperative details, and wound complications were measured from 2015 to 2018 at the University of California San Francisco. Two cohorts were generated based on the modality of postoperative wound management and compared on wound healing outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 53 groin incisions, 29 were managed with standard dressings, and 24 received iNPWT. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Patients who received iNPWT had a significantly lower rate of infection (8.33% vs 31.0%, P = 0.04) and dehiscence (0% vs 41.3%, P < 0.01). Furthermore, the iNPWT group had a significantly lower rate of reoperation (0% vs 17.2%, P = 0.03) for wound complications within 30 days compared with the control group and a moderately reduced rate of readmission (4.17% vs 20.7%, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of infection, reoperation, and dehiscence were significantly reduced in patients whose groin incisions were managed with iNPWT compared with standard wound care. Readmission rates were also decreased, but this difference was not statistically significant. Our results suggest that implementing iNPWT for the management of groin incisions, particularly in patients undergoing vascular operations for CLTI, may significantly improve clinical outcomes.

Oncologic Safety of Immediate Oncoplastic Surgery Compared with Standard Breast-Conserving Surgery for Patients with Invasive Lobular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast grows in a diffuse pattern, resulting in a high risk of positive margins at surgical resection. Oncoplastic approaches have been shown to reduce this risk, but concerns persist around the safety of immediate oncoplastic surgery for those with ILC. This study evaluated the short- and long-term oncologic outcomes of immediate oncoplastic surgery for patients with ILC. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed an institutional database of stages I to III ILC patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with or without immediate oncoplastic surgery (oncoplastic closure or oncoplastic reduction mammoplasty [ORM]). The study compared positive margin rates, rates of successful BCS, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) by type of surgery. RESULTS: For 494 patients the findings showed that the use of immediate ORM was associated with significantly lower odds of positive margins (odds ratio [OR], 0.34; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.66; p = 0.002). Both lumpectomy with oncoplastic closure and ORM were significantly associated with higher rates of successful BCS than standard lumpectomy (94.2 %, 87.8 %, and 73.9 %, respectively; p < 0.001). No difference in RFS was observed between those undergoing immediate oncoplastic surgery and those undergoing standard lumpectomy alone. CONCLUSIONS: The patients with stages I to III ILC who underwent immediate oncoplastic surgery had significant benefits including lower odds of positive margins and higher rates of successful BCS, with both types of immediate oncoplastic surgery showing similar RFS compared with lumpectomy alone. This supports the oncologic safety of immediate oncoplastic surgery for diffusely growing tumors such as ILC, providing it an ideal option for patients desiring BCS.

Paraspinous Muscle Flaps in Complex Pediatric Spine Surgeries: A 12-Year Single Institution Experience.

PURPOSE: The benefits of paraspinous flaps in adult complex spine surgery patients are established in the literature; however, their use in pediatric patients has not been well described. This study compares clinical outcomes with and without paraspinous muscle flap closure in pediatric patients who have undergone spine surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all pediatric spine surgeries at the University of California, San Francisco from 2011 to 2022. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts based on whether the plastic surgery service closed or did not close the wound with paraspinous muscle flaps. We matched patients by age, American Society of Anesthesiology classification, prior spinal surgical history, and diagnosis. Surgical outcomes were compared between the 2 cohorts. RESULTS: We identified 226 pediatric patients who underwent at least one spinal surgery, 14 of whom received paraspinous flap closure by plastic surgery. They were matched in a 1:4 ratio with controls (n = 56) that did not have plastic surgery closure. The most common indication for plastic surgery involvement was perceived complexity of disease by the spine surgeon with concern for inadequate healthy tissue coverage (78.6%), followed by infection (21.4%). Postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. The plastic surgery cohort had a higher rate of patients who were underweight (57.1% vs 14.3%, P < 0.01) and had positive preoperative wound cultures (28.6% vs 8.9%, P = 0.05), as well as a higher rate of postoperative antibiotic usage (78.6 vs 17.9%, P < 0.01). There was no difference in recorded postoperative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Spine surgeons requested paraspinous flap closure for patients with more complex disease, preoperative infections, history of chemotherapy, or if they were underweight. Patients with paraspinous flap coverage did not have increased postoperative complications despite their elevated risk profile. Our findings suggest that paraspinous muscle flaps should be considered in high-risk pediatric patients who undergo spine surgery.

The impact of post-mastectomy radiation timing on overall outcomes of autologous free-flap breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in autologous breast reconstruction is controversial. Our study compares overall reconstructive outcomes in patients who received post-mastectomy radiation therapy either before or after the autologous flap. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was performed for patients who underwent free flap breast reconstruction and post-mastectomy radiation from January 2004 through January 2021. Demographic, intraoperative, and post-operative variables were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 452 free flaps were identified, and 82 underwent PMRT. 59.8% were radiated with an expander prior to free flap surgery (PreFlap), and 40.2% flaps underwent PMRT (PostFlap). PostFlap patients were significantly younger (43.0 vs. 47.9 years, p = .016). There were no significant differences in free flap outcomes between the two cohorts including thrombosis, venous congestion, flap loss, takebacks, fat necrosis, seroma, or infection. Mastectomy skin flap necrosis was significantly higher in the PostFlap cohort (9.1% vs. 0%, p = .032), but nipple necrosis rates did not differ. There were no significant differences in number or need for revision surgeries, fat necrosis, or fat grafting between groups. However, there were significantly more total reconstructive complications, including infection and wound breakdown, experienced by the PreFlap cohort (46.9% vs. 24.2%, p = .038). CONCLUSIONS: Timing of PMRT did not impact free flap outcomes, but those who had the expander radiated experienced significantly more complications overall. For the 34.7% of patients in the preFlap group who planned for autologous reconstruction form initial consultation, radiation after the flap may have improved their overall outcomes. As added complications cause delays in cancer therapy and final reconstruction, our results suggest that PMRT of the flap when possible may improve the overall experience for breast cancer patients.

Relationship between Body Mass Index and Outcomes in Microvascular Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Increasing body mass index (BMI) is a known risk factor for autologous microsurgical breast reconstruction. No prior studies have stratified outcomes across BMI ranges or defined the BMI at which complication rates dramatically increase. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent abdominally based autologous free flap breast reconstruction at their institution between 2004 and 2021. Clinical, surgical, and outcomes data were collected. Patients were stratified into five BMI categories: 25, 25.01 to 30, 30.01 to 35, 35.01 to 40, and greater than 40 kg/m 2 . Complication rates were analyzed across these groups, and a receiver-operating characteristic analysis was used to determine an optimal BMI cutoff point. RESULTS: A total of 365 patients (545 breasts) were included in this study. The rates of several breast complications significantly increased with increasing BMI at distinct levels, including any breast complication (BMI >30 kg/m 2 ), unplanned reoperation (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ), fat necrosis (BMI >40 kg/m 2 ), wound breakdown requiring re-operation (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ), any infection (BMI >30 kg/m 2 ), infection requiring oral antibiotics (BMI >25 kg/m 2 ), infection requiring intravenous antibiotics (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ), and mastectomy flap necrosis (BMI >35 kg/m 2 ). The rates of many abdominal complications significantly increased with increasing BMI at distinct levels as well, including delayed wound healing (BMI >30 kg/m 2 ), wound breakdown requiring re-operation (BMI >40 kg/m 2 ), any infection (BMI >25 kg/m 2 ), and infection requiring oral antibiotics (BMI >25 kg/m 2 ). Optimal BMI cutoffs of 32.7 and 30.0 kg/m 2 were determined to minimize the occurrence of any breast complication and any abdomen complication, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative weight loss has great potential to alleviate surgical risk in overweight and obese patients pursuing autologous breast reconstruction. The authors' results quantify the risk reduction based on a patient's preoperative BMI. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.

Nipple-Sparing Mastectomies in Patients over the Age of 60 Years: Factors Associated with Surgical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) outcomes in the elderly have not been well characterized. The goal of this study was to evaluate NSM outcomes in patients over age 60. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-institution retrospective cohort study was performed for NSM patients over the age of 60 from January 2004 to January 2022. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were collected. RESULTS: We identified 136 women who underwent a total of 200 NSMs at a mean age 65.2 years and with mean body mass index of 25. Most (56%) had invasive breast cancer, requiring neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 15%, and 17.5% had radiation prior to NSM. A total of 91% had immediate tissue expander placement. The infection rate was 19%, with 11.5% requiring expander explantation in the follow-up period. In binomial logistic regression analysis, prior radiation increased the odds of any complication by 2.9 (OR 2.93, CI 1.30-6.58, p = 0.009) and increased the odds of infection by 5.7 (OR 5.70, CI 1.95-16.66, p = 0.001), but no associations were seen for other covariates including age, comorbidities, prior chemotherapy, or presence of invasive disease. Diabetes increased the odds of wound breakdown specifically by 9.0 (OR 8.97, CI 2.01-39.92, p = 0.004). Local recurrence was 3% in mean 3.4-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support NSM in patients over the age of 60 years with acceptable outcomes within the standard of care. Locoregional recurrence was within the cited range of 0-5%, and only diabetes and prior radiation were associated with reconstructive complications. NSM should thus be offered when appropriate regardless of increased age to achieve oncologic and reconstructive goals.

Evaluating mesh use for abdominal donor site closure after deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvement in abdominal morbidity with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction compared to prior abdominally-based free flap breast reconstruction, abdominal bulge, and hernia rates have been cited anywhere from 2% to 33%. As a result, some surgeons utilize mesh or other reinforcement upon donor-site closure, but its benefit in preventing abdominal wall morbidity has not been well-defined for DIEP flaps. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate DIEP donor-site closure techniques and the impact of mesh type and plane on abdominal-wall morbidity including hernia and bulge, relative to primary fascial closure. METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMED, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS were systematically reviewed for studies evaluating DIEP flap breast reconstruction abdominal-donor site closure, where any mesh reinforcement or primary fascial closure was specified, and postoperative outcomes of hernia and/or abdominal bulge were reported. Analysis was performed in Review Manager (RevMan) evaluating mesh use, type, and plane relative to primary fascial closure, using the Mantel-Haenszel method to calculate odds ratios (ORs) of significance level p < .05, and a random effects model to account for inter-study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Of the 2791 DIEP patients across 11 studies, 1901 patients underwent primary closure and 890 were repaired with mesh. When hernia and/or bulge were combined into a single complication, the use of any mesh did not significantly reduce its odds compared to primary closure (OR = 0.69, p = .20). Similarly, the use of any mesh did not significantly reduce the odds of bulge alone compared to primary closure (OR = 0.62, p = .43). However, the odds of hernia alone were significantly reduced by 72% with any mesh use (OR = 0.28, p = .03). CONCLUSION: Mesh use was significantly associated with decreased odds of hernia alone with DIEP flap surgery, but there was no difference in bulge or combined hernia/bulge rates. As bulge is the more common abdominal morbidity after DIEP flap harvest in a patient with no prior abdominal surgery or risk factor for hernia, mesh use is not indicated in abdominal closure of all DIEP patients. Future prospective studies are warranted to characterize the specific indications for mesh use in the setting of DIEP flap surgery.

Reviewing the Impact of Topical and Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Use in Breast Plastic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Topical and intravenous uses of tranexamic acid (TXA) have been shown to reduce bleeding and ecchymosis in various surgical fields. However, there is a lack of data evaluating the efficacy of TXA in breast surgery. This systematic review evaluates the impact of TXA on hematoma and seroma incidence in breast plastic surgery. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed for all studies that evaluated the use of TXA in breast surgery including reduction mammoplasty, gynecomastia surgery, masculinizing chest surgery, or mastectomy. Outcomes of interest included rate of hematoma, seroma, and drain output. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 3297 breasts, of which 1656 were treated with any TXA, 745 with topical TXA, and 1641 were controls. There was a statistically significant decrease in hematoma formation seen in patients who received any form of TXA compared with control (odds ratio [OR], 0.37; P < 0.001), and a similar tendency toward decreased hematoma with topically treated TXA (OR, 0.42; P = 0.06). There was no significant difference in seroma formation with any TXA (OR, 0.84; P = 0.33) or topical TXA (OR, 0.91; P = 0.70). When stratified by surgery, there was a 75% decrease in the odds of hematoma formation with any TXA compared with the control for oncologic mastectomy (OR, 0.25; P = 0.003) and a 56% decrease in nononcologic breast surgery (OR, 0.44; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that TXA may significantly reduce hematoma formation in breast surgery and may also decrease seroma and drain output. Future high-quality prospective studies are required to evaluate the utility of topical and intravenous TXA in decreasing hematoma, seroma, and drain output in breast surgery patients.

Evaluation of Microvascular Autologous Breast Reconstruction in Patients Older Than 60 Years.

BACKGROUND: While free-flap breast reconstruction becomes more common, it is still approached with caution in older patients. Outcomes in the elderly population have not been well characterized, especially with regard to donor-site sequalae. This study compares microvascular autologous breast reconstruction outcomes in patients older and younger 60 years. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review was performed for microvascular autologous breast reconstruction from January 2004 through January 2021. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative variables, including breast flap and donor-site complications, were evaluated. RESULTS: Five hundred forty-five breast free flaps were identified, of which 478 (87.8%) were performed on patients younger than 60 years (mean, 46.2 years) and 67 (12.2%) older than 60 years (mean, 64.8 years; P = 0.000). Hyperlipidemia was significantly higher in older patients (19.4% vs 9.6%, P = 0.016). Mean operative time was 46.3 minutes faster in the older cohort ( P = 0.030). There were no significant differences in free-flap loss, venous congestion, takeback, hematoma, seroma, wound healing, or infection. Interestingly, there were significantly more total breast flap complications (28.5% vs 16.4%, P = 0.038) and higher rates of fat necrosis (9.6% vs 1.5%, P = 0.026) in the younger cohort. Significantly more abdominal donor-site complications (43.3% vs 21.3%, P = 0.000) were seen in the older people, with increased wound breakdown ( P = 0.000) and any return to the operating room (20.9% vs 9.8%, P = 0.007). Older patients were also significantly more likely to require surgical correction of an abdominal bulge or hernia (10.4% vs 4%, P = 0.020). The mean follow-up was 1.8 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed no worsening of individual breast flap outcomes in the older people. However, there were significantly more abdominal complications including surgical correction of abdominal bulge and hernia. This may be related to the inherent qualities of tissue aging and should be taken into consideration for flap selection. These results support autologous breast reconstruction in patients older than 60 years, but patients should be counseled regarding potentially increased abdominal donor-site sequelae.

Modifiable Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy Factors and Impact on Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and other modifiable radiation factors have been associated with decreased radiation toxicity. These factors could allow for improved reconstructive outcomes in patients requiring post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). However, they have not yet been well-studied in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate tissue expander placement followed by PMRT. Radiation characteristics were collected, including radiation technique, bolus regimen, X-ray energy, fractionation, maximum radiation hot spot (DMax), and tissue volume receiving >105% (V105%) or >107% (V107%) of the prescription dose. Reconstructive complications occurring after initiation of PMRT were analyzed with respect to these radiation characteristics. RESULTS: 68 patients (70 breasts) were included in this study. The overall complication rate was 28.6%, with infection being the most common complication (24.3%), requiring removal of the tissue expander or implant in greater than half of infections (15.7%). DMax was greater in patients who required explant after PMRT, and this approached statistical significance (114.5+/-7.2% v. 111.4+/-4.4%, p=0.059). V105% and V107% were also greater in patients who required explant after PMRT (42.1+/-17.1% v. 33.0+/-20.9% and 16.4+/-14.5% v. 11.3+/-14.6%, respectively), however this was not statistically significant (p=0.176 and p=0.313, respectively). There were no significant differences in complication rates between patients with respect to radiation technique or other radiation characteristics studied. CONCLUSIONS: Minimizing the radiation hot spots and volumes of tissue receiving greater than the prescription dose of radiation may improve reconstructive outcomes in patients undergoing IBBR followed by PMRT.

Immediate Versus Delayed-Immediate Autologous Breast Reconstruction After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Autologous reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is either performed in a delayed-immediate fashion, with a tissue expander placed initially at the time of mastectomy and autologous reconstruction performed later, or immediately at the time of NSM. It has not been determined which method of reconstruction leads to more favorable patient outcomes and lower complication rates. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent autologous abdomen-based free flap breast reconstruction after NSM between January 2004 and September 2021. Patients were stratified into 2 groups by timing of reconstruction (immediate and delayed-immediate). All surgical complications were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred one patients (151 breasts) underwent NSM followed by autologous abdomen-based free flap breast reconstruction during the defined time period. Fifty-nine patients (89 breasts) underwent immediate reconstruction, whereas 42 patients (62 breasts) underwent delayed-immediate reconstruction. Considering only the autologous stage of reconstruction in both groups, the immediate reconstruction group experienced significantly more delayed wound healing, wounds requiring reoperation, mastectomy skin flap necrosis, and nipple-areolar complex necrosis. Analysis of cumulative complications from all reconstructive surgeries revealed that the immediate reconstruction group still experienced significantly greater cumulative rates of mastectomy skin flap necrosis. However, the delayed-immediate reconstruction group experienced significantly greater cumulative rates of readmission, any infection, infection requiring PO antibiotics, and infection requiring IV antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate autologous breast reconstruction after NSM alleviates many issues seen with tissue expanders and delayed autologous reconstruction. Although mastectomy skin flap necrosis occurs at a significantly greater rate after immediate autologous reconstruction, it can often be managed conservatively.

Expanding Candidacy for Nipple-sparing Mastectomy in Women with Large or Ptotic Breasts: Staged Reconstruction Outcomes.

Development of the nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) technique has dramatically improved breast reconstruction, and preservation of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) positively influences patient satisfaction. However, women with large, ptotic breasts have historically not been candidates for NAC preservation due to impaired perfusion of the NAC leading to NAC loss. Although reduction mammoplasty has been reported as a strategy to increase candidacy for NSM, success rates and surgical outcomes for this staged approach are not well described in heterogeneous clinical scenarios. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent reduction mammoplasty followed by NSM at our institution between January 2014 and September 2020. Clinical and surgical characteristics were collected. All surgical complications, including NAC loss rates, were analyzed. Results: Forty-one patients (74 breasts) underwent staged NSM during the defined time period. The average time between breast reduction mammoplasty and NSM was 213 days. Overall, 94.6% of NSM resulted in successful nipple preservation. There was no significant difference in the time interval from breast reduction mammoplasty to NSM between patients who had NAC loss (208 days) and those who did not (213 days, P = 0.87). Increasing age was significantly associated with risk of NAC loss (P = 0.002) in our cohort. Conclusions: In women with breast ptosis (which precludes safe NSM), it is possible to first offer reduction mammoplasty to preserve the NAC for future NSM. Our data suggest that 3 months between staged procedures is a safe time frame.

Long-Term Outcomes in Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based breast reconstruction remains the most often used method following mastectomy, but data are lacking regarding differences in complications and long-term patient-reported outcomes for two-stage subpectoral versus prepectoral reconstruction. This study sought to better understand the risks and impact of these reconstructive approaches on overall satisfaction. METHODS: Patients who underwent unilateral or bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy and two-stage implant-based reconstruction from 2014 to 2019 were identified from the electronic medical records and contacted via email to complete the BREAST-Q survey. Overall satisfaction was measured by the question, "How happy are you with the outcome of your breast reconstruction?" using a six-point Likert scale. Patients were grouped into subpectoral or prepectoral cohorts. Complications were evaluated retrospectively. Only patients who were at least 6 months from their final reconstruction were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 582 patients contacted, 206 (35%) responded. The subpectoral ( n = 114) and prepectoral ( n = 38) groups did not differ significantly by demographic or treatment characteristics. BREAST-Q scores were also comparable. Complication rates were similar, but prepectoral patients had a significantly higher rate of capsular contracture (16% versus 4%, P < 0.05). Bivariate ordered logistic regression identified prepectoral implant placement, having any postoperative complication, and capsular contracture as predictors of less overall happiness. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' study suggests that prepectoral patients may have slightly higher complication rates but are as satisfied as subpectoral patients after at least a year of follow-up. Further studies should investigate risk factors for capsular contracture, how the risk changes over time, and how the risk affects patient satisfaction.

Safety of Incision Placement with Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

In nipple-sparing mastectomy, adequate perfusion to the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) during reconstruction is paramount to avoiding unwanted outcomes. Previous studies have suggested that periareolar incisions may result in higher rates of NAC complications. However, studies to date have not specifically investigated this in prepectoral reconstruction. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of incision location on NAC complications in patients undergoing prepectoral breast reconstruction. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent immediate two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy between 2015 and 2018 at a single institution. We identified two types of incisions utilized: superior periareolar or inframammary fold (IMF). Patient demographics, comorbidities, and surgical details were compared between incision types, as were NAC complications. Results: A total of 181 consecutive prepectoral breast reconstructions were included for analysis. A superior periareolar incision was used in 113 reconstructions (62%), and an IMF incision was used in 68 reconstructions (38%). There were 33 (18%) total NAC complications in our series. The periareolar incision group had a higher rate of any NAC complication (25% versus 7.4%; P < 0.01), as well as a higher rate of nipple necrosis requiring debridement (9.7% versus 1.5%; P = 0.03). Conclusions: In patients undergoing immediate two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy, periareolar incisions are associated with an increased risk of NAC complications compared with IMF incisions. For patients who are candidates for either an IMF or periareolar incision, a periareolar incision should be avoided.

Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Reduces Opioid Consumption and Pain After Mastectomy: A Head-to-Head Comparison With Submuscular Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Acute pain after mastectomy is increased with concurrent breast reconstruction. One postulated advantage of prepectoral breast reconstruction is less postoperative pain; however, no comparisons to partial submuscular reconstruction have been made to date. Here, we examined the postoperative pain experienced between patients with prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders from 2012 to 2019 by a single plastic surgeon. Patient demographics, surgical details, and anesthetic techniques were evaluated, and our primary outcome compared postoperative opioid usage between prepectoral and subpectoral reconstructions. Our secondary outcome compared pain scores between techniques. RESULTS: A total of 211 subpectoral and 117 prepectoral reconstruction patients were included for analysis. Patients with subpectoral reconstructions had higher postoperative opioid usage (80.0 vs 45.0 oral morphine equivalents, P < 0.001). Subpectoral patients also recorded higher maximum pain scores compared with prepectoral reconstructions while admitted (7 of 10 vs 5 of 10, P < 0.004). Multivariable linear regression suggests that mastectomy type and subpectoral reconstruction were significant contributors to postoperative opioid use (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Prepectoral breast reconstruction was associated with less postoperative opioid consumption and lower postoperative pain scores as compared with subpectoral reconstruction, when controlling for other surgical and anesthesia factors. Future randomized controlled trials are warranted to study how postoperative pain and chronic pain are influenced by the location of prosthesis placement in implant-based postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

Direct-to-Implant Versus 2-Stage Breast Reconstruction: Which Technique Is Better? An Analysis of 104 Patients at a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: Two-stage (TS) implant-based reconstruction is the most commonly performed method of reconstruction after mastectomy. A growing number of surgeons are offering patients direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstruction, which has the potential to minimize the number of surgeries needed and time to complete reconstruction, as well as improve health care utilization. However, there are conflicting data regarding the outcomes and complications of DTI, and studies comparing the 2 methods exclusively are lacking. METHODS: Patients undergoing implant-based reconstruction after mastectomy within a large interstate health system between 2015 and 2019 were retrospectively identified and grouped by reconstruction technique (TS and DTI). The primary outcomes were a composite of complications (surgical site occurrences), health care utilization (reoperations, unplanned emergency department visits, and readmissions), and time to reconstruction completion. Risk-adjusted logistic and generalized linear models were used to compare outcomes between TS and DTI. RESULTS: Of 104 patients, 42 underwent DTI (40.4%) and 62 underwent TS (59.6%) reconstruction. Most demographic characteristics, and oncologic and surgical details were comparable between groups ( P > 0.05). However, patients undergoing TS reconstruction were more likely to be publicly insured, have a smoking history, and undergo skin-sparing instead of nipple-sparing mastectomy. The composite outcome of complications, reoperations, and health care utilization was higher for DTI reconstruction within univariate (81.0% vs 59.7%, P = 0.03) and risk-adjusted analyses (odds ratio, 3.78 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-13.9]; P < 0.04). Individual outcome assessment showed increased mastectomy flap necrosis (16.7% vs 1.6%, P < 0.01) and reoperations due to a complication (33.3% vs 16.1%; P = 0.04) in the DTI cohort. Although DTI patients completed their aesthetic revisions sooner than TS patients (median, 256 days vs 479 [ P < 0.01]; predicted mean difference for TS [reference DTI], 298 days [95% CI, 71-525 days]; P < 0.01), the time to complete reconstruction (first to last surgery) did not differ between groups (median days, DTI vs TS, 173 vs 146 [ P = 0.25]; predicted mean difference [reference, DTI], -98 days [95% CI, -222 to 25.14 days]; P = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients, DTI reconstruction was associated with higher complications, reoperations, and health care utilization with no difference in time to complete reconstruction compared with TS reconstruction. Further studies are warranted to investigate patient-reported outcomes and cost analysis between TS and DTI reconstruction.