Splitting the Difference: Using Synthetic and Biologic Mesh to Decrease Cost in Prepectoral Immediate Implant Breast Reconstruction.

SUMMARY: Prepectoral breast reconstruction has minimized morbidity and dynamic deformities associated with submuscular implant-based breast reconstruction. However, reliance on implant coverage with acellular dermal matrix in immediate implant reconstruction remains limited by high material costs. The authors describe a technique in which anterior implant coverage in prepectoral reconstruction is split into acellular dermal matrix inferolaterally and synthetic, absorbable mesh superiorly. Use of acellular dermal matrix inferiorly provides coverage and reinforces the inframammary fold, whereas the absorbable mesh is trimmed and sutured to the acellular dermal matrix at the appropriate tension to support the implant and relieve pressure on mastectomy flaps. A retrospective review was performed on all consecutive prepectoral one-stage breast reconstructions using this technique at a single institution. Patient demographics, mastectomy and reconstruction characteristics, reconstructive outcomes, and cost of support materials were queried and analyzed. Eleven patients (21 breasts) underwent prepectoral immediate implant reconstruction with Vicryl and acellular dermal matrix anterior coverage. Average mastectomy weight was 775.8 g. Smooth, round cohesive implants were used in all cases and average implant size was 514.5 ml. Overall complication rates were low and included one minor infection (4.8 percent) and one case of minor mastectomy flap and partial nipple necrosis each (4.8 percent). Calculated cost savings of Vicryl and acellular dermal matrix anterior coverage was up to $3415 in unilateral and $6830 in bilateral cases. Prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix inferiorly and Vicryl mesh superiorly is a safe technique that decreases material costs associated with support materials and allows the surgeon to precisely control the implant pocket and position. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Putting Together the Pieces: Development and Validation of a Risk-Assessment Model for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing outcomes and assessing appropriate candidates for breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy is an ongoing goal for plastic surgeons. METHODS: All patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy from 2006 to June of 2018 were reviewed and randomly divided into test and validation groups. A logistic regression model calculating the odds ratio for any complication from 12 risk factors was derived from the test group, whereas the validation group was used to validate this model. RESULTS: The test group was composed of 537 nipple-sparing mastectomies (50.2 percent), with an overall complication rate of 27.2 percent (146 nipple-sparing mastectomies). The validation group was composed of 533 nipple-sparing mastectomies (49.8 percent), with an overall complication rate of 22.9 percent (122 nipple-sparing mastectomies). A logistic regression model predicting overall complications was derived from the test group. Nipple-sparing mastectomies in the test group were divided into deciles based on predicted risk in the model. Risk increased with probability decile; decile 1 was significantly protective, whereas deciles 9 and 10 were significantly predictive for complications (p < 0.0001). The relative risk in decile 1 was significantly decreased (0.39; p = 0.006); the relative risk in deciles 9 and 10 was significantly increased (2.71; p < 0.0001). In the validation group, the relative risk of any complication in decile 1 was decreased at 0.55 (p = 0.057); the relative risk in deciles 9 and 10 was significantly increased (1.89; p < 0.0001). In a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the area under the curve was 0.668 (p < 0.0001), demonstrating diagnostic meaningfulness of the model. CONCLUSION: The authors establish and validate a predictive risk model and calculator for nipple-sparing mastectomy with far-reaching impact for surgeons and patients alike.

What Is in a Number? Evaluating a Risk Assessment Tool in Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

Ischemic complications after immediate breast reconstruction have devastating consequences; however, individual risk assessment remains challenging. We seek to develop an intraoperative assessment tool to assist in estimating risk of ischemic complications in immediate breast reconstruction. METHODS: Patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction were prospectively identified and evaluated with an intraoperative mastectomy flap ischemia risk assessment tool consisting of 8 binary questions. Breast measurements and patient demographics were recorded. Reconstructions were then prospectively evaluated postoperatively for ischemic complications. Outcomes were analyzed with significance set at P values <0.05. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients underwent 45 immediate breast reconstruction. The majority of reconstructions were tissue expander based (64.4%) following therapeutic (62.2%) skin-sparing (93.3%) mastectomies. Average follow-up was 11.16 months. Sixteen reconstructions (35.6%) experienced an ischemic complication. The average total mastectomy flap ischemic risk score was 4.29. The correlation value of higher scores with increasing ischemic complications was 0.65. Reconstructions with scores greater than 5 had significantly higher rates of ischemic complications (P = 0.0025). Reconstructions with a score of >6 and >7 also had significantly higher rates of ischemic complications (P < 0.0001, each). The sensitivity and specificity of intraoperative mastectomy flap compromise were 81.25% and 62.07%. CONCLUSIONS: Ischemic complications after immediate breast reconstruction were positively correlated with higher scores using a clinical intraoperative mastectomy flap ischemia risk assessment tool. Scores greater than 5 seem to be a threshold value at which ischemic complications are significantly greater. This simple, easy-to-implement intraoperative tool may assist plastic surgeons in assessing risk and optimizing outcomes in immediate breast reconstruction.

Transversus Abdominis Plane Blocks in Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction: Analysis of Pain, Narcotic Consumption, Length of Stay, and Cost.

BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane blocks are increasingly being used in microvascular breast reconstruction. The implications of these blocks on specific reconstructive, patient, and institutional outcomes remain to be fully elucidated. METHODS: Patients undergoing abdominally based microvascular breast reconstruction from 2015 to 2017 were reviewed. Length of stay, complications, narcotic consumption, donor-site pain, and hospital expenses were compared between patients who did and did not receive transversus abdominis plane blocks with liposomal bupivacaine. Outcomes were subsequently compared in patients with elevated body mass index. RESULTS: Fifty patients (43.9 percent) received blocks [27 (54.0 percent) under ultrasound guidance] and 64 patients (56.1 percent) did not. Patients with the blocks had significantly decreased oral and total narcotic consumption (p = 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively) and significantly less donor-site pain (3.3 versus 4.3; p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in hospital expenses between the two cohorts ($21,531.53 versus $22,050.15 per patient; p = 0.5659). Patients with a body mass index of 25 kg/m(2) or greater who received a block had a significantly decreased length of stay (3.8 days versus 4.4 days; p = 0.0345) and decreased narcotic consumption and postoperative pain compared with patients without blocks. Patients with a body mass index less than 25 kg/m(2) did not have a significant difference in postoperative pain, narcotic consumption, or length of stay between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Transversus abdominis plane blocks with liposomal bupivacaine significantly reduce oral and total postoperative narcotic consumption and donor-site pain in all patients after abdominally based microvascular breast reconstruction without increasing hospital expenses. The blocks also significantly decrease length of stay in patients with a body mass index greater than or equal to 25 kg/m(2). CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Cost Analysis of Intraoperative Subareolar Frozen Section During Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Permanent paraffin subareolar biopsy during nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) tests for occult cancer at the nipple-areolar complex. Intraoperative subareolar frozen section can provide earlier detection intraoperatively. Cost analysis for intraoperative subareolar frozen section has never been performed. METHODS: NSM cases from 2006-2013 were reviewed. Patient records including financial charges were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 480 subareolar biopsies for NSM from 2006-2013, 21 were abnormal (4.4 %). A total of 307 of the subareolar biopsies included intraoperative frozen section. Of the 307, 12 (3.9 %) were abnormal with 7 of 12 detected on intraoperative frozen section. The median baseline charge for an intraoperative subareolar frozen section was $309 for an estimated total cost of $94,863 in 307 breasts. The median baseline charge for interval operative resection of a nipple-areolar complex following an abnormal subareolar pathology result was $11,021. Intraoperative subareolar biopsy avoided an estimated six return trips to the operating room for savings of $66,126. At our institution, routine use of intraoperative frozen section resulted in an additional $28,737 in healthcare charges or $95 per breast. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first cost analysis to evaluate intraoperative subareolar frozen section in NSM. This practice obviated an estimated six return trips to the operating room. With our institutional frequency of abnormal subareolar pathology, intraoperative frozen sections resulted in a marginal increased charge per mastectomy.