Streptococcus canis Native Aortic Valve Endocarditis Linked to Cat Exposure: A Case Report and Review.

Streptococcus canis is an uncommon human pathogen, but documented infections have been mostly associated with exposure to dogs. There are only five documented cases of endocarditis secondary to streptococcus canis, with all cases except one documenting exposure to a canine. We present a 74-year-old male with a history of Type 2 diabetes mellitus, CKD 3, moderate aortic stenosis and remote exposure to agent orange, who was found to have Streptococcus canis native valve endocarditis without exposure to a dog. To the best of our knowledge this case is the first case of endocarditis linked to feline exposure.

The Palpable Nodule after Autologous Fat Grafting: Distinguishing Benign versus Malignant Lesions in Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Nodule formation after autologous fat grafting to the breast is the most common complication. In the reconstructive population, this generates significant patient anxiety and presents a diagnostic challenge. The authors characterized palpable nodule occurrence after autologous fat grafting in breast reconstruction and compared benign versus malignant nodule characteristics. METHODS: Chart review of the senior author's experience with breast fat grafting was performed. Data extracted included demographics, intraoperative details, nodule data, radiographic characteristics, and biopsy results. Logistic regression identified risk factors for nodule formation. Unpaired t tests and Fisher exact tests compared characteristics of benign versus malignant nodules. RESULTS: In total, 775 breasts were identified that underwent 1158 fat grafting procedures, of which 67 (8.6 percent) developed palpable nodules. Sonographic characterization of nodules included presumed fat necrosis (38.2 percent), benign lesions (27.6 percent), presumed oil cysts (17.1 percent), indeterminate (8.9 percent), and concerning for malignancy (8.1 percent). Lesions concerning for malignancy were more often irregular (10.0 percent versus 0 to 2.9 percent of benign nodules) and more often larger than 0.8 cm in greatest dimension (80 percent versus 42.9 to 61.8 percent of benign nodules). Six patients developed a palpable local recurrence. Malignant nodules tended to be larger (1.45 cm versus 0.70 cm; p = 0.03), were more often vascular (50 percent versus 3.8 percent; p = 0.03), and tended to occur later (17.5 months versus 10.0 months; p = 0.60). Benign nodules occurred in the setting of larger fat graft volumes (64.2 cc versus 40.0 cc; p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: This study provides the first comparison of radiographic and clinical characteristics between benign and malignant palpable nodules after autologous fat grafting in breast reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OE EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Judging an Expander by Its Cover: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Impact of Tissue Expander Surface Texture on First-Stage Breast Reconstruction Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There is increased scrutiny of texturing on implants and a paucity of data looking at texturing on expanders. Because of the difficulty in controlling potential confounders with these comparative studies, the authors performed propensity matching between smooth and textured tissue expander cohorts to provide definitive insight into the impact of expander texture on breast reconstruction outcomes. METHODS: A single-surgeon experience with immediate two-stage breast reconstruction was reviewed for 90-day postoperative complications after mastectomy and expander placement. Variables extracted included demographics, comorbidities, tissue expander texturing, mastectomy type, infection, seroma, skin flap necrosis, dehiscence, explantation, and overall complication rates. Subjects were 1:1 propensity matched using the nearest neighbor matching algorithm with caliper (maximum propensity score difference) of 0.2, and chi-square test was performed for statistical analysis. RESULTS: After 1:1 propensity matching, 282 reconstructed breasts were analyzed (141 textured versus 141 smooth expanders). Textured expanders had higher minor infection rates than smooth expanders (5.0 percent versus 0 percent; p = 0.024). Smooth expanders had higher seroma rates than textured expanders (5.0 percent versus 0.7 percent; p = 0.031). Smooth expanders also had longer drain retention (20.4 days versus 16.8 days; p = 0.001). There was no difference in other complications, including major infection, explantation, or any complication, between textured and smooth expanders. CONCLUSIONS: Textured expanders are associated with increased minor infection risk, whereas smooth expanders are associated with increased seroma formation. However, these differing complication profiles coalesce to equal explantation rates. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Lateral and Inferior Implant Malposition in Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction: Incidence and Risk Factors.

Implant malposition is one of the most common causes for revision after prosthetic breast reconstruction. There is a paucity of research on the incidence, etiology and risk factors for implant malposition in this setting. METHODS: Retrospective review of a single surgeon's prosthetic breast reconstructions was performed. Variables collected included age, BMI, radiation, chemotherapy, implant characteristics and malposition location (inferior or lateral). Binary logistic regression identified risk factors for malposition. Chi-square test assessed malposition rate as a function of implant volume to BMI subgroups. RESULTS: Of 836 breasts, 82 (9.8%) exhibited implant malposition. Risk factors for any malposition were older age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.07), BMI<25 (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.00-2.70) and bilateral reconstruction (OR 13.41, 95% CI 8.50-21.16). Risk factors for inferior malposition were older age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.06), BMI<25 (OR 3.43, 95% CI 1.88-6.26) and bilateral reconstructions (OR 11.50, 95% CI 6.79-19.49), while risk factors for lateral malposition were only older age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08) and bilateral reconstructions (OR 7.08, 95% CI 4.09-12.26). Post-mastectomy radiation was protective against lateral malposition (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10-0.88). Stratification by implant volume and BMI demonstrated patient subgroups with distinct patterns of malposition (incidence 0.0% versus 10.9%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to identify risk factors for implant malposition after prosthetic breast reconstruction. Different risk factors contributed to malposition in different directions. The effect of implant size on malposition was mediated through BMI, highlighting the interplay of implant and patient characteristics with respect to malposition.

The Relationship between Animation Deformity and Patient-Reported Outcomes: Application of the BREAST-Q to a Quantitative Stratification of Animation Severity.

BACKGROUND: Animation deformity can occur following subpectoral breast reconstruction and is an oft-touted rationale for prepectoral reconstruction. Despite increasing recognition, there is a paucity of patient-reported outcome studies in women with animation deformity. METHODS: Women presenting after subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction were evaluated for animation deformity. Video analysis and quantitative deformity assessment were performed in conjunction with BREAST-Q surveys. BREAST-Q data were compared to our quantitative animation grading scale to assess the relationship between animation severity and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one subpectoral breast reconstructions met inclusion criteria. Average scores were 67.8 ± 17.9 of 100 for satisfaction with breasts and 78.3 ± 14.1 of 100 for physical well-being. Animation deformity severity did not correlate with satisfaction with breasts (p = 0.44). Physical well-being, particularly pain-related questions, increased with increasing animation (p = 0.01); specifically, patients reported significantly less pulling, nagging, and aching in the breast (p = 0.01, p = 0.001, and p = 0.004, respectively). Patients with the least and most severe animation deformity had significantly higher numbers of revision procedures (0.89 and 1.03 procedures, respectively) compared with patients with intermediate deformity (0.49 procedures; p = 0.01 and p = 0.009, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although pectoralis release creates a more mobile-and more animating-reconstruction, this same release may lead to less pain because muscle is no longer contracting against a fixed space. This may lead to two distinct origins of subpectoral revision: (1) patients in pain (but low animation) and (2) patients with visibly distorted animation (but low pain). CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.

A Quantitative Analysis of Animation Deformity in Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Animation deformity is characterized by implant deformity with pectoralis contraction after subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction. Extant methods to measure and analyze animation deformity are hampered by the paucity of objective, quantitative data. The authors endeavored to supplement subjective measures with an in-depth quantitative analysis. METHODS: Patients undergoing subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction were followed prospectively with video analysis of animation deformity. Nipple displacement and surface area of contour deformity in resting and contracted states were quantified using imaging software. Degree of animation was compared to breast size, body mass index, division of pectoralis muscle, complications, and radiation therapy. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five reconstructed breasts (88 patients) were analyzed. Mean nipple displacement was 2.12 ± 1.04 cm, mean vector of nipple displacement was 62.5 ± 20.6 degrees, and mean area of skin contour irregularity was 16.4 ± 15.41 percent. Intraoperative pectoralis division, smooth/round implants, and bilateral reconstructions were associated with greater deformity. A three-tiered grading system based on thresholds of 2-cm net nipple displacement and 25 percent skin contour irregularity placed 41.4 percent of breasts in grade 1, 35.9 percent in grade 2, and 22.8 percent in grade 3. Interrater variability testing demonstrated 89.5 percent overall agreement (kappa = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the first quantitative analysis of animation deformity in prosthetic breast reconstruction. Geometric analysis of nipple displacement vector and increasing animation with pectoralis division both implicate the inferior pectoralis myotome as a primary driver of animation deformity. A concomitant grading schema was developed to provide a standardized framework for discussing animation from patient to patient and from study to study.

An overview of animation deformity in prosthetic breast reconstruction.

Animation deformity is an unsightly complication after sub-pectoral breast reconstruction characterized by implant displacement with pectoralis muscle contraction. Recent increased awareness of this phenomenon has driven interest in pre-pectoral breast reconstruction but research is limited regarding the causes and implications of animation deformity. Specifically, no patient-specific risk factors have been identified as contributing to animation deformity. Placement in a sub-pectoral plane and division of the pectoralis are the only peri-operative factors associated with severity of animation deformity. Our own quantitative analysis of animation deformity has further refined our understanding of this phenomenon, which we present here along with a review of current grading scales. We also more broadly review the current literature surrounding animation deformity, including its causes, risk factors, impact on patient outcomes and current treatment options. Overall, patients find this to be an emotionally distressing complication and most patients would like to be educated on alternative surgical options to avoid animation deformity. Treatment options range from conversion to a pre-pectoral plane to muscle-splitting techniques to selective nerve ablation to Botox injections. Further research into causes, implications and ways to enhance pre-pectoral reconstruction are needed to improve patient outcomes with this phenomenon.

A Comparison of Fat Graft Processing Techniques: Outcomes in 1,158 Procedures in Prosthetic Breast Reconstructions.

As fat grafting in breast reconstruction evolves, questions of technique and outcomes persist. We compared 2 common fat processing techniques-decantation (DEC) versus closed wash and filtration (CWF)-with regard to outcomes and efficacy. METHODS: Chart review of a single surgeon experience with breast fat grafting was performed. Data extracted included demographics, technique, complications, graft volume, and revision rates. Secondarily, the timeline of complication profiles was analyzed. Lastly, subgroup analysis of radiated versus nonradiated breast outcomes was performed. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred fifty-eight fat grafting procedures were performed on 775 breasts (654 DEC, 504 CWF). Time-to-event analysis for all complications showed no difference between groups. Independent risk factors for fat necrosis included DEC technique, body mass index >30 kg/m2, and fat injection >75 mL. The majority of cases of fat necrosis, cyst/nodule formation, ultrasounds, and biopsies occurred more than 6 months after grafting. Average graft volume was lower in DEC compared with CWF breasts (50.6 versus 105.0 mL, P < 0.01), and more DEC breasts required repeat fat grafting procedures (39.9% versus 29.6%, P < 0.01). Radiated breasts received larger fat graft volume (89.9 versus 72.4 mL, P < 0.01) and required more fat graft procedures (average 1.62 versus 1.47, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest series of breast reconstruction fat grafting to date. DEC harvest technique may be a risk factor for fat necrosis, which results in less fat injection and greater need for repeat procedures. Similarly, radiated breasts require larger graft volume and more repeat procedures.