A Unique Advantage of a 24-hour Surgical Delay in Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

The surgical delay technique can be used effectively in autologous breast reconstruction when there is unfavorable flap vascular anatomy or when the reconstruction necessitates a larger volume of donor tissue to obtain optimal results. The length of time between surgically delaying the flap to pedicle division and inset of the flap often varies based on surgeon preference but is typically approximately a week or longer. The authors present a case in which a 24-hour surgical delay was successfully used to augment deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps for autologous reconstruction. This technique is beneficial as it does not allow time for scarring and adhesions to develop between stages and allows for both stages to be performed in the same hospital admission.

The Effect of Venous Augmentation on Complication Rates in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: With the rising popularity of the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap in breast reconstruction, use of the superficial inferior epigastric vein (SIEV) to augment venous outflow has been proposed as a strategy to prevent venous congestion, a complication positively associated with flap volume. This study evaluated the impact of routine SIEV venous augmentation on the risk of vascular complications or operative fat necrosis in the context of flap size and operating time. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study compared complication rates of patients with SIEV-augmented DIEP flaps to controls over a 3-year period. Outcomes assessed included vascular complications, defined as venous congestion or compromise requiring take-back, partial flap necrosis, total flap loss, as well as operative fat necrosis. Relative risk was modeled by Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. Sensitivity analysis was performed to assess for an interaction effect by flap mass. RESULTS: The study sample included 197 patients with 316 flaps. The mean mass of the SIEV-augmented flaps was significantly greater than in the control group (832.9 vs. 653.9 g; p = 0.0007). After adjustment for flap characteristics, patient demographic factors, and comorbidities, pooled risk of vascular complication and operative fat necrosis was found to be significantly lower in the SIEV-augmented group compared to controls (hazard ratio = 0.33, 95% CI [0.11-1.00]; p = 0.0489). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated no effect interaction by flap weight (p = 0.5139). CONCLUSION: Routine venous outflow augmentation via anastomosis of SIEV to the internal mammary vein perforator at the second intercostal space significantly reduced the risk of vascular complications and operative fat necrosis, regardless of flap weight. No significant increase in operative time was observed among cases in which augmentation was performed.

Reconstructing Failure: Assessing Surgical and Patient Reported Outcomes Following Loss of Initial Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Breast reconstruction failure, defined as the removal of a prosthetic device or flap without immediate replacement, can be traumatic for patients. We aim to describe the progression of patients who experience tissue expander (TE), implant, or autologous breast reconstructive failure and assess the patient reported outcomes (PROs) among patients who undergo additional reconstruction. METHOD: Patients undergoing TE, implant, or autologous breast reconstruction between 2017 and 2022 were included, and patients with reconstructive failures were identified. Outcomes of interests included (1) receipt of additional reconstruction and (2) BREAST-Q scores 1-year after reconstructive failure. We also performed a propensity-matched analysis between patients who undergo secondary reconstruction and patients who had an uncomplicated reconstruction. RESULTS: 4,258 TE, 4,420 implant, and 1,545 autologous breast reconstruction patients were included. Of patients who experienced reconstructive failures, 49.5% of TE, 4.8% of implant, and 53.8% of autologous patients underwent secondary reconstruction. Age, psychiatric diagnosis, chemotherapy, radiation, and mastectomy type were associated with increased likelihood of secondary reconstruction. Between patients with and without additional reconstruction, higher Psychosocial Well-being trended towards the former cohort (61 [Interquartile Range: 56, 80] vs 50 [46, 65], p=0.085). Propensity-matched analysis demonstrated comparable PROs at 1-year after definite reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Less than half of reconstructive failure patients undergo an additional reconstruction. Patients with secondary reconstruction may have improved Psychosocial Well-being than those who do not and comparable PROs to those who had uncomplicated initial reconstruction. Surgeons should counsel patients with reconstructive failures that although traumatizing, secondary reconstruction may be beneficial.

Predicting Postoperative Satisfaction with Breasts: How Important is the Preoperative BREAST-Q Score?

BACKGROUND: The role that preoperative Satisfaction with Breast plays in a patient's postoperative course after postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) is not understood. The aim of this study is to understand the impact of the preoperative score on postoperative outcome as an independent variable. METHODS: We examined patients who underwent PMBR between 2017 and 2021 and who completed the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breasts at 1 year postoperatively. Two multiple linear regression models (Model 1 with the preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts score and Model 2 without the preoperative score), likelihood ratio tests, simple t-statistics, and sample patient dataset to predict the 1 year score were performed. Multiple imputation was used to account for missing preoperative scores. RESULTS: Overall, 2324 patients were included. Model 1 showed that the preoperative score is significantly associated with the postoperative score (ß = 0.09, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.14; p < 0.001). Comparing Model 1 and Model 2 demonstrated that including preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts in a regression significantly improves model fit (test statistic = 10.04; p = 0.0021). Using the absolute value of the t-statistics as a measure of variable importance in linear regression, the importance of the preoperative score was quantified as 3.39-more important than neoadjuvant radiation, mastectomy weight, body mass index, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, and race, but less than adjuvant radiation, reconstruction type, and psychiatric diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts scores are an important independent predictor of postoperative satisfaction after PMBR. Just as vital sign and work-up are carefully documented before surgery, preoperative scores should be collected to pre-emptively gauge patients' satisfaction and optimize postoperative outcomes.

Imaging in Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

The evolution of imaging actively shapes clinical management in the field. Ultrasonography (US), computed tomography angiography (CTA), and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) stand out as the most extensively researched imaging modalities for ABR. Ongoing advancements include "real-time" angiography and three-dimensional (3D) surface imaging, and future prospects incorporate augmented or virtual reality (AR/VR) and artificial intelligence (AI). These technologies may further enhance perioperative efficiency, reduce donor-site morbidity, and improve surgical outcomes in ABR.

Breast Conserving Therapy Preserves Sexual Well-Being More Than Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Trends, Factors, and Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Up to 85% of breast cancer patients report sexual health concerns, but their concerns are not adequately addressed by providers. Sexual dysfunction among breast cancer patients remains understudied. We aimed to investigate the impact of breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) on the sexual health of breast cancer patients and frequency of sexual medicine consultation in postoperative care. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent BCT or PMBR and completed the Sexual Well-being of the BREAST-Q BCT and Reconstruction modules from January 2010 to October 2022. We compared Sexual Well-being scores between BCT and PMBR patients overtime up to 5-years postoperatively, delineated associated demographic and clinical factors with Sexual Well-being, and evaluated the frequency of sexual medicine consultations. RESULTS: Of 15,857 patients, 8,510 (53.7%) underwent BCT and 7,347 (46.3%) underwent PMBR. PMBR patients had significantly lower Sexual Well-being scores than BCT patients from preoperative to 5-year postoperative. Regression analyses showed that PMBR patients scored 7.6 points lower at 1-year than BCT patients. Separated marital status, higher body mass index, cardiovascular disease, hyperlipidemia, psychiatric diagnosis, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were associated with significantly lower Sexual Well-being. 299 (3.5%) of BCT and 400 (5.4%) of PMBR patients received sexual medicine consultations. CONCLUSION: Sexual health concerns must be considered in breast cancer care, particularly among patients who undergo PMBR. Although many patients experience sexual dysfunction, most do not receive a sexual medicine consultation, suggesting an opportunity for providers to improve breast cancer patients' sexual health.

Impact of Mastectomy Flap Necrosis on Patient-Reported Quality-of-Life Measures After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Preliminary Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mastectomy skin flap necrosis (SFN) is common following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), but studies on its quality-of-life (QOL) impact are limited. We examined patient-reported QOL and satisfaction after NSM with/without SFN utilizing the BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) survey. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing NSM between April 2018 and July 2021 at our institution were examined; the BREAST-Q PROM was administered preoperatively, and at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. SFN extent/severity was documented at 2-3 weeks postoperatively; QOL and satisfaction domains were compared between patients with/without SFN. RESULTS: A total of 573 NSMs in 333 patients were included, and 135 breasts in 82 patients developed SFN (24% superficial, 56% partial thickness, 16% full thickness). Patients with SFN reported significantly lower scores in the satisfaction with breasts (p = 0.032) and psychosocial QOL domains (p = 0.009) at 6 months versus those without SFN, with scores returning to baseline at 1 year in both domains. In the "physical well-being-of-the-chest" domain, there was an overall decline in scores among all patients; however, there were no significant differences at any time point between patients with or without SFN. Sexual well-being scores declined for patients with SFN compared with those without at 6 months and also at 1 year, but this did not reach significance (p = 0.13, p = 0.2, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing NSM who developed SFN reported significantly lower satisfaction and psychosocial well-being scores at 6 months, which returned to baseline by 1 year. Physical well-being of the chest significantly declines after NSM regardless of SFN. Future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are needed to determine SFN's impact on long-term QOL.

Breast-Conserving Therapy Versus Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although studies have compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after breast conserving-therapy (BCT) and postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR), they often have been confounded by treatment or other factors that complicate a direct comparison. This study aimed to compare PROs after BCT and PMBR by using propensity score-matching analysis. METHODS: Patients who underwent BCT or PMBR between 2010 and 2022 and completed the BREAST-Q were identified. Each BCT patient was matched to a PMBR patient using nearest-neighbor 1:1 matching with replacement for each BREAST-Q time point. Outcomes included all prospectively collected BREAST-Q domains preoperatively, at 6 months, and at 1, 2, and 3 years postoperatively. A 4-point difference was considered clinically meaningful. RESULTS: For this study, 6215 patients (2501 BCT [40.2%] and 3714 PMBR [59.8%] patients) were eligible, and 2616 unique patients were matched. Preoperatively, 463 BCT and 463 PMBR patients were matched for analysis (6 months [443 matched pairs], 1 year [639 matched pairs], 2 years [421 matched pairs], 3 years [254 matched pairs]). At 6 months postoperatively, the BCT patients scored higher on all BREAST-Q domains than the PMBR patients (p < 0.05; differences > 4 points). At 1, 2, and 3 years, the patients who underwent BCT consistently had superior Satisfaction With Breasts, Psychosocial Well-Being, and Sexual Well-Being (p < 0.05), and the differences were clinically meaningful. CONCLUSION: In this statistically powered study, the BCT patients reported higher quality of life than the PMBR patients in early assessment and also through 3 years of follow-up evaluation. Given the equivalency in survival and recurrence outcomes between BCT and PMBR, patients eligible for either surgery should be counseled regarding the superiority of BCT in terms of PROs.

Osseous Maxillary Reconstruction with Immediate Dental Implant Placement: An Optimized Workflow for the Oncologic Patient.

INTRODUCTION: Maxillary reconstruction is a complex undertaking characterized by a 3-dimensional surgical site with deficiencies in multiple tissue types. Prior to virtual surgical planning(VSP), bony reconstruction was inaccurate and inefficient, thus reconstructions defaulted to soft tissue flaps or obturators. The current study describes an efficient and accurate approach to bony maxillary reconstruction with immediate dental implant placement(IDIP). METHODS: A reconstructive workflow was developed for osseous reconstruction to improve functional and aesthetic outcomes. Critical aspects include VSP, 3-D printed plates and IDIP. Review of a prospectively maintained database identified patients who underwent osseous maxillary reconstruction with a fibula flap and immediate dental implants from 2017-2022, with a focus on oncologic characteristics and reconstructive outcomes. RESULTS: During the study, 20 patients underwent maxillary reconstruction with VSP and IDIP. One dental implant out of 55 failed to osseointegrate and no flaps were lost. Three patients suffered partial loss of the fibula skin island; one required palatal closure with a radial forearm flap, and two were managed with outpatient debridement. Fifteen patients achieved either an interim or final retained dental prosthesis. All prostheses achieved acceptable aesthetic results without the instability associated with non-bone borne devices(e.g.dentures/obturators). No patients experienced delays in oncologic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: VSP technology has enabled surgeons to replace like with like to achieve better outcomes with acceptable morbidity for maxillary defects. IDIP provides all patients an opportunity for a fixed prosthesis even though not all complete the process. This maxillary reconstruction workflow can be safely accomplished in oncologic patients with promising and effective early results.

Increased Time Interval of Postoperative Flap Monitoring After Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Hourly flap checks are the most common means of flap monitoring during the first 24 hours following autologous breast reconstruction (ABR). This practice often requires intensive care unit (ICU) admission, which is a key driver of health care costs and decreased patient satisfaction. This study addresses these issues by demonstrating decreased cost and length of admission associated with a 4-hour interval between flap checks during the first 24 hours following ABR. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of ABR surgeries performed by multiple surgeons from 2017 to 2020. Two cohorts were identified, one that underwent flap checks every hour in the ICU (Q1 cohort) and the other that underwent flap checks every 4 hours on the hospital floor (Q4 cohort). Our primary outcome measures were length of stay (LOS), flap takebacks, flap loss, and encounter cost. RESULTS: Rates of flap takeback and loss did not differ between cohorts (P = 0.18, P = 0.21). The Q4 cohort's average LOS was shorter than the Q1 cohort (P = 0.002). The Q4 cohort's average cost was also $25,554.80 less than the Q1 cohort (P < 0.001). This association persisted after controlling for LOS, operating room takeback, timing and laterality of reconstruction, and flap configuration (hazard ratio = 0.65, P = 0.0007). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the benefits of lengthened flap check intervals during the first 24 hours following ABR. These intervals decrease the cost of ABR while also maintaining safety, making ABR a more accessible option for breast reconstruction patients.

Contemporary Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction: Abdominally Based Flaps.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Understand the types of abdominally based flaps, their anatomy, and their drawbacks. 2. Understand important aspects of the history and physical examination of patients wishing to undergo these procedures. 3. Understand the benefits of preoperative planning and its role in avoiding complication. 4. Understand the operative steps of the procedures and tips to increase efficiency. 5. Understand the postoperative care of these patients and the role of enhanced recovery pathways. SUMMARY: In this article, the authors review the history, current state, and future directions related to abdominally based microsurgical breast reconstruction. This article covers preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative considerations intended to improve patient outcomes and prevent complications. Evidence-based findings are reported when available to comprehensively review important aspects of these procedures.

Satisfaction with Breasts Following Autologous Reconstruction: Assessing Associated Factors and the Impact of Revisions.

BACKGROUND: Autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) may confer higher patient reported outcomes than implant breast reconstruction, but an in-depth examination of factors associated with satisfaction after ABR is lacking. We aimed to determine independent predictors of 1-year Satisfaction with Breasts after ABR and assess the importance of elective procedures on satisfaction. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent abdominal-based ABR between 2010 and 2021 and completed the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breasts module at 1-year was performed. Elective procedures comprised of breast revision and nipple areolar complex (NAC) reconstruction. RESULTS: 959 patients were included. Satisfaction with Breasts score improved from 53 (IQR: 44 to 64) preoperatively to 64 (53 to 78) at 1-year postoperatively (p<0.001). Factors significantly associated with decreased postoperative score included lower preoperative scores (ß=0.19 [95% CI: 0.08, 0.31], p=0.001), older age (ß=-0.17 [-0.34, -0.01], p=0.042), Asian race (versus White, ß=-6.7 [-12, -1.7], p=0.008), and a history of psychiatric diagnoses (ß=-3.4 [-6.2, -0.66], p=0.015). Patients who received radiation (ß=-5.6 [-9.0, -2.3], p=0.001) or had mastectomy skin flap/nipple necrosis (ß=-3.8 [-7.6, -0.06], p=0.046) also had significantly decreased scores. Satisfaction with Breasts significantly improved after breast revision procedures (54 [42 to 65] to 65 [54 to 78], p<0.001) and NAC reconstruction (58 [47 to 71] to 67 [57 to 82], p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Multiple independent patient and treatment level factors are associated with lower 1-year Satisfaction with Breasts following ABR. Elective procedures have the potential to improve satisfaction. Understanding these findings is imperative for optimizing clinical decision making and managing expectations.

Age Impacts Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes following Post Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: While the current literature indicates that age should not be a deterring factor in postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR), the true impact of increasing age on postoperative outcomes remains unknown. The purpose of this study is to understand the impact of age on complications and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) using BREAST-Q longitudinally 5-years after PMBR. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent autologous (ABR) or implant-based reconstruction (IBR). Age was studied as both a categorical and continuous variable. Outcome measures included complications and BREAST-Q scores at preoperative, 6-months, and 1-5 years postoperative. RESULTS: 4,730 patients were included, of which 1,536 (32.5%) underwent ABR while 3,194 (67.5%) had IBR. Older age was significantly associated with increased risk of developing mastectomy skin flap/nipple necrosis, infection, and seroma. Older age was negatively correlated with Satisfaction with Breasts (ß=-0.06 [-0.12, -0.01]; p=0.033) and positively correlated with Psychosocial Well-being (ß=0.14 [0.09, 0.20]; p<0.001). Older age was not correlated with Physical Well-being of the Chest (ß=-0.03 [-0.08, 0.02], p=0.2) and Sexual Well-being (ß=-0.04 [-0.12, 0.02]; p=0.2). Subgroup analyses of ABR and IBR patients demonstrated different complications and PRO profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of the impact of age on surgical outcomes and PROs suggests that complication rates increase with age and older age is negatively correlated with Satisfaction with Breasts but positively correlated with Psychosocial Well-being. Overall, older patients should be informed about the potential associated risks and anticipated patient reported outcomes.

BREAST-Q REACT: Qualitative Assessment of the Design, Functionality, and Clinical Utility of a New Score Interpretation Tool.

BACKGROUND: The BREAST-Q real-time engagement and communication tool (REACT) was developed to aid with BREAST-Q score interpretation and guide patient-centered care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the perspectives of patients and providers on the design, functionality, and clinical utility of REACT and refine the REACT based on their recommendations. METHODS: We conducted three patient focus groups with women who were at least 6 postoperative months from their postmastectomy breast reconstruction, and two provider focus groups with plastic surgeons, breast surgeons, and advanced practice providers. Focus groups were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: A total of 18 breast reconstruction patients and 14 providers participated in the focus groups. Themes identified by thematic analysis were organized into two categories: (1) design and functionality, and (2) clinical utility. On the design and functionality of REACT, four major themes were identified: visual appeal and usefulness; contextualizing results; ability to normalize patients' experiences, noting participants' concerns; and suggested modifications. On the clinical utility of REACT, three major themes were identified: potential to empower patients to communicate with their providers; increase patient and provider motivation to engage with the BREAST-Q; and effective integration into clinical workflow. CONCLUSION: Patients and providers in this qualitative study indicated that with some modifications, REACT has a great potential to elevate the clinical utility of the BREAST-Q by enhancing patient-provider communication that can lead to patient-centered, clinically relevant action recommendations based on longitudinal BREAST-Q scores.

Analyzing mastectomy and reconstruction weight in immediate autologous breast reconstruction: A preliminary study.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to explore the ideal breast size by assessing the relationship between mastectomy to free flap weight ratio and complications as well as patient-reported outcomes in autologous breast reconstruction (ABR). METHOD: A retrospective review of patients undergoing bilateral immediate ABR with mastectomy and flap weights available was completed. Patients were divided into three groups based on the ratio of mastectomy to flap weights. The patients were grouped as "maintained" if the flap weight was within 10% of the mastectomy weight. Patients with a weight difference greater than 10% were used to declare "downsized" or "upsized." Outcomes included complications and four domains of the BREAST-Q at 1-year postoperatively. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-nine patients were included in the analysis, of which 112 were downsized, 91 maintained, and 156 upsized, respectively. Presence of complications did not significantly differ among the groups. At 1-year postoperatively, Sexual Well-being significantly differed (p = 0.033). Between preoperative and 1 year, patients who upsized experienced an improvement in Satisfaction with Breasts by 16 points (p < 0.001), while patients who downsized experienced a decline in Physical Well-being of the Chest by 7 points (p = 0.016). Multivariable linear regression model showed that Sexual Well-being was 13 points lower in the downsized cohort than in the maintained cohort (ß = -13, 95% confidence interval: -21 to -5.4; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although complication rates do not significantly differ between the three cohorts, patients who downsize may have lower Sexual Well-being postoperatively. Surgeons should consider our preliminary findings to counsel patients preoperatively about the predicted breast size and the impact of downsizing on sexual health.