Patient-reported outcomes: A primer for plastic surgeons.

Surgical care today is no longer evaluated only on clinical outcomes but also on holistic patient wellbeing. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a representation of the patient's perspective on their results and wellbeing. The aim of this review is to establish PROs as the center of healthcare and plastic surgery, to delineate important PROs in plastic surgery practice and research, to discuss the future of PROs within our discipline, and to encourage surgeons to incorporate PROs into their practice. PROs are an important parallel of clinical outcomes in that they can use the patient's perspective to 1) support clinical findings, 2) detect differences in care when there are no clear clinical differences, 3) track progress longitudinally, and 4) support systemic improvements in healthcare. Plastic surgery as a field is naturally aligned with PROs because, as a discipline, we focus on patient form and function. The emerging forefronts of plastic surgery such as lymphedema care, gender-affirming care, peripheral nerve surgery, migraine surgery, and breast implant illness are critically dependent on PROs. In the next decade, we predict that there will be a continued proliferation of robust PRO measures and integration into healthcare delivery. Outcomes research in surgery should continue to evolve as surgeons provide increasingly more benefits to improve patient wellbeing. Plastic surgeons must continue to play a prominent role in the future of PROs.

Medicinal leeches for surgically uncorrectable venous congestion after free flap breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Free tissue transfer is an accepted method for breast reconstruction. Surgically uncorrectable venous congestion is a rare but real occurrence after these procedures. Here, we report our experience with the management of surgically uncorrectable venous congestion after free flap breast reconstruction using medicinal leech therapy. METHODS: We queried our prospectively maintained institutional database for all patients with venous congestion after free flap breast reconstruction since 2005. Chart review was performed for all patients having post-operative venous congestion. We compared patients with surgically correctable venous congestion and surgically uncorrectable venous congestion requiring medicinal leech therapy. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients had post-operative venous congestion, and four of these patients were surgically uncorrectable requiring medicinal leech therapy. Patients who required leech therapy had lower hemoglobin nadirs, received more blood transfusions, and received a higher number of total units of red blood cells than patients who did not require leech therapy. Among four patients who required leech therapy, one flap was partially salvaged and three flaps were completely lost. Leech therapy was associated with higher total flap loss rates (75.0% vs. 42.1%) and longer length of stay (8.0 ± 3.6 days vs. 6.5 ± 2.1 days) when compared to non-leeched flaps. These differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.32 and P = 0.43, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with surgically uncorrectable venous congestion after free flap breast reconstruction, total flap loss is common despite leech therapy. When venous congestion cannot be corrected, total flap removal may be a better option than attempted salvage with leech therapy.

Delayed autologous breast reconstruction: factors which influence patient decision making.

BACKGROUND: Autologous breast reconstruction timing continues to be controversial. The purpose of this study was to examine delayed autologous breast reconstruction at a center favouring immediate reconstruction to better understand factors driving the decision to delay reconstruction. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all free autologous breast reconstruction patients between 2005 and 2009, focussing on ethnicity, cancer stage, unilateral or bilateral reconstructions, initial management, distance from the institution, and average income. Delayed reconstructions were compared to immediate reconstructions. All delayed reconstructions were surveyed to examine treatment and reconstruction decisions and satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 709 patients, 169 (24%) underwent delayed treatment. Delayed reconstruction patients had higher cancer stages (p < 0.001), higher rates of pre-reconstruction radiation therapy (64% vs. 20%, p < 0.0001) and higher rates of unilateral reconstruction (64% vs. 48%, p < 0.001). Seventy delayed patients responded to the survey (41%), with 75% having had their initial mastectomy at an outside health system. Only 51% discussed immediate reconstruction prior to electing delayed treatment and 41% had no discussion regarding advantages or disadvantages to reconstructive options. Approximately 30% noted no choice in their reconstructive timing. Forty five percent would elect immediate reconstruction if given the option. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that women may not be receiving all available information prior to undergoing mastectomy for initial breast cancer treatment. As a significant portion of women electing delayed reconstruction would elect immediate autologous reconstruction if given the option again, there is room for improvement in pre-operative patient education and in the education of our oncology colleagues.