Remote Symptom Monitoring with Clinical Alerts Following Mastectomy: Do Early Symptoms Predict 30-Day Surgical Complications.

BACKGROUND: Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) for real-time remote symptom monitoring facilitate early recognition of postoperative complications. We sought to determine whether remote, electronic, patient-reported symptom-monitoring with Recovery Tracker predicts 30-day readmission or reoperation in outpatient mastectomy patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of breast cancer patients who underwent outpatient (< 24-h stay) mastectomy with or without reconstruction from April 2017 to January 2022 and who received the Recovery Tracker on Days 1-10 postoperatively. Of 5,130 patients, 3,888 met the inclusion criteria (2,880 mastectomy with immediate reconstruction and 1,008 mastectomy only). We focused on symptoms concerning for surgical complications and assessed if symptoms reaching prespecified alert levels-prompting a nursing call-predicted risk of 30-day readmission or reoperation. RESULTS: Daily Recovery Tracker response rates ranged from 45% to 70%. Overall, 1,461 of 3,888 patients (38%) triggered at least one alert. Most red (urgent) alerts were triggered by pain and fever; most yellow (less urgent) alerts were triggered by wound redness and pain severity. The 30-day readmission and reoperation rates were low at 3.8% and 2.4%, respectively. There was no statistically significant association between symptom alerts and 30-day reoperation or readmission, and a clinically relevant increase in risk can be excluded (odds ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval 0.8-1.46; p = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy with or without reconstruction in the ambulatory setting have a low burden of concerning symptoms, even in the first few days after surgery. Patients can be reassured that symptoms that do present resolve quickly thereafter.

Early Complications in Prepectoral Tissue Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral implant placement for postmastectomy breast reconstruction has increased in recent years. Benefits of prepectoral reconstruction may include lack of animation deformities and reduced postoperative pain, but its complication profile is currently unclear. This study aimed to examine the complication profile of prepectoral tissue expanders (TEs) to determine factors associated with TE loss. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to identify all patients who underwent immediate prepectoral TE reconstruction from January 2018 to June 2021. The decision to use the prepectoral technique was based on mastectomy skin quality and patient comorbidities. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative details were evaluated. Outcomes of interest included TE loss, seroma, hematoma, infection/cellulitis, mastectomy skin flap necrosis requiring revision, and TE exposure. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with TE loss. RESULTS: The study identified 1225 TEs. The most frequent complications were seroma (8.7%, n = 106), infection/cellulitis (8.2%, n = 101), and TE loss (4.2%, n = 51). Factors associated with TE loss in the univariate analysis included ethnicity, history of smoking, body mass index, mastectomy weight, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In the multivariate regression analysis, only mastectomy weight had a positive association with TE loss (odds ratio, 1.001; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Prepectoral two-stage breast reconstruction can be performed safely with an acceptable early complication profile. The study data suggest that increasing mastectomy weight is the most significant factor associated with TE loss. Further research examining the quality of the soft tissue envelope and assessing patient-reported outcomes would prove beneficial.

The Impact of Psychiatric Diagnoses on Patient-reported Satisfaction and Quality of Life in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of psychiatric diagnoses among a sample of breast reconstruction patients and measure the association between these diagnoses and reconstruction-related, patient-reported outcomes. BACKGROUND: The impact of psychiatric disorders in conjunction with breast cancer diagnosis, treatment, and reconstruction have the potential to cause significant patient distress but remains not well understood. METHODS: A retrospective review of postmastectomy breast reconstruction patients from 2007 to 2018 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center was conducted. Patient demographics, comorbidities, cancer characteristics, psychiatric diagnoses, and BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module scores (measuring satisfaction with breast, well-being of the chest, psychosocial, and sexual well-being) at postoperative years 1 to 3 were examined. Mixed-effects models and cross-sectional linear regressions were conducted to measure the effect of psychiatric diagnostic class type and number on scores. RESULTS: Of 7414 total patients, 50.1% had at least 1 psychiatric diagnosis. Patients with any psychiatric diagnoses before reconstruction had significantly lower BREAST-Q scores for all domains at all time points. Anxiety (50%) and depression (27.6%) disorders were the most prevalent and had the greatest impact on BREAST-Q scores. Patients with a greater number of psychiatric diagnostic classes had significantly worse patient-reported outcomes compared with patients with no psychiatric diagnosis. Psychosocial (ß: -7.29; 95% confidence interval: -8.67, -5.91), and sexual well-being (ß: -7.99; 95% confidence interval: -9.57, -6.40) were most sensitive to the impact of psychiatric diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health status is associated with psychosocial and sexual well-being after breast reconstruction surgery as measured with the BREAST-Q. Future research will need to determine what interventions (eg, screening, early referral) can help improve outcomes for breast cancer patients with psychiatric disorders undergoing breast reconstruction.

Interpreting the BREAST-Q for Breast-Conserving Therapy: Minimal Important Differences and Clinical Reference Values.

BACKGROUND: The BREAST-Q is an important tool for evaluating patient satisfaction and quality of life in breast-conserving therapy (BCT) patients, but its clinical utility is limited by the lack of guidance on score interpretation. This study determines reference values and the minimal important difference (MID) for the BREAST-Q BCT module. METHODS: A retrospective review of BCT patients at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from January 2011 to December 2021 was performed. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize median BREAST-Q scores. Distribution-based analyses estimated MIDs based on 0.2 standard deviation of baseline BREAST-Q scores and 0.2 standardized response mean of the difference between baseline and 1-year postoperative BREAST-Q scores. MIDs for different clinical groupings based on body mass index, radiation, and reexcision also were estimated. RESULTS: Overall, 8060 patients were included for determining reference values, and 5673 patients were included for estimating MIDs. Median BREAST-Q scores trended upwards and stabilized by 2 years after surgery for all domains except Physical Well-Being of the Chest, which decreased and stabilized by 2 years. A score interpretation tool, the Real-Time Engagement and Communication Tool, was created based on 25th percentile, median, and 75th percentile scores trajectories. All MID estimates ranged from 3 to 5 points; 4 points was determined to be appropriate for use in clinical practice and research. CONCLUSIONS: Reference values and MIDs are crucial to BREAST-Q score interpretation, which can lead to improved clinical evaluation and decision making and improved research methodology. Future research should validate this study's findings in different patient cohorts.

ASO Visual Abstract: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients with Clinical T4 Breast Cancer Treated with Mastectomy With and Without Reconstruction.

AIM: Do patient-reported outcome measures differ among clinical T4 patients undergoing mastectomy with and without reconstruction? FINDINGS: Neither reconstruction nor timing of reconstruction were associated with superior outcomes for breast satisfaction, physical well-being of the chest, or psychosocial well-being at any timepoint.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Patients Who Have Clinical T4 Breast Cancer Treated via Mastectomy with and Without Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Patients with clinical T4M0 breast cancer are recommended to undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy, modified radical mastectomy, and postmastectomy radiotherapy. This study determined whether BREAST-Q scores differ by decision to pursue reconstruction or timing of reconstruction. METHODS: This retrospective, single-institutional study analyzed cT4 breast cancer patients from 2014 to 2021 without evidence of distant metastatic disease undergoing mastectomy with or without reconstruction. As routine care, BREAST-Q was administered preoperatively, then 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Satisfaction and quality-of-life domains were compared between mastectomy with no reconstruction (NR), immediate reconstruction (IR), and delayed reconstruction (DR) groups. RESULTS: Of the 144 patients eligible for this study, 71 (49%) had NR, 36 (25%) had DR, and 37 (26%) had IR. The patients undergoing reconstruction were younger and more likely to elect contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Timing of reconstruction was not associated with significant differences in satisfaction with breasts (SATBR) at any time point. For the patients who had DR, breast satisfaction increased over time after reconstructive surgery. Physical well-being of the chest (PWB-CHEST) did not significantly differ among IR, DR, and NR at any time point. The patients who underwent DR experienced improvement in PWB-CHEST scores from preoperative scores. The patients with IR and NR experienced PWB-CHEST decline over time. Psychosocial well-being (PSWB) did not differ significantly across time or by subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The patients with T4 breast cancer who elected reconstruction did not differ in patient-reported outcomes based on timing of reconstruction. In the DR cohort, SATBR significantly improved after reconstructive surgery. These data can help inform breast reconstructive decision-making for patients facing the choice among DR, IR, and NR.

Moving towards patient-reported outcomes in routine clinical practice: implementation lessons from the BREAST-Q.

PURPOSE: Longitudinal, routine utilization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical care has been challenging. The purpose of this study is to describe a quality improvement initiative to improve patient engagement with the BREAST-Q, a gold-standard PROM for breast reconstruction. METHODS: In 2011, we implemented the BREAST-Q as part of routine care. In 2018, we began a quality improvement initiative to increase BREAST-Q patient participation. The BREAST-Q was administered at every clinic visit via an institutional patient portal or an in-clinic tablet; digital dashboard technologies were used to improve workflow integration, real-time accountability, and immediate data availability at clinic visits. High clinical staff engagement was encouraged by assigning "BREAST-Q Champions." BREAST-Q completion data and patient characteristics were examined to understand non-response to the assessment. RESULTS: Following quality improvement, the average annual BREAST-Q completion rate increased from 42.8% in 2011-2017 to 87.6% in 2019, the last full year of our study period. High completion rates were maintained January-July 2020; however, a significantly larger proportion of BREAST-Qs were completed at home in 2020 versus the same period in 2019 (49.7 vs. 38.8%, p < 0.001), potentially due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared with non-responders, responders were younger (49.7 vs. 52.2 years, p < 0.001), more likely to be white (76.9 vs. 73.6%, p < 0.001), and had private insurance (79.4 vs. 69.8%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our quality improvement initiative successfully increased routine completion of the BREAST-Q. Similar implementation techniques may prove beneficial at other institutions interested in incorporating PROMs into routine care.

Outcomes and Perioperative Risk Factors after Oncologic Free-Flap Scalp Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the risk factors associated with complications after free flap scalp reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to identify patient, scalp defect, and flap characteristics associated with increased risk of surgical complications. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed of free-flap scalp reconstruction in oncologic patients at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2002 to 2017. Data collection included patient, defect, flap, and complication characteristics. Complications were classified into major, defined as complications requiring surgical intervention, and minor, defined as complications requiring conservative treatment. Risk factors and outcome variables were compared using chi-square with Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 63 free flaps to the scalp in 58 patients were performed; average follow-up was 3.5 years. Most flaps were muscle-only or musculocutaneous. One-third of patients with free flaps experienced complications (n = 21, 15 major and 6 minor). Examining risk factors for complications, patients with cardiovascular disease were nearly three times more likely to have suffered a major complication than patients without cardiovascular disease (36.7 vs. 12.1%, p = 0.04). This was the only significant risk factor noted. Perioperative radiotherapy, prior scalp surgery, flap type, and recipient vessel selection were found to be nonsignificant risk factors. CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular disease may be a significant marker of risk for major complications in patients undergoing free-flap reconstruction of the scalp. This information should be used to help guide perioperative counseling and decision making in this challenging patient population.

A Cohort Analysis of Early Outcomes After AlloDerm, FlexHD, and SurgiMend Use in Two-Stage Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is frequently utilized in prepectoral breast reconstruction, but few studies have examined the role of ADM type in complication risk. OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to determine the impact of ADM type on early complication rates in 2-stage alloplastic prepectoral breast reconstruction. METHODS: We performed a cohort examination of all patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate 2-stage alloplastic prepectoral breast reconstruction with ADM support at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2018 to 2021. ADM types utilized included AlloDerm (LifeCell Corporation, Branchburg, NJ), FlexHD (MTF Biologics, Edison, NJ), and SurgiMend (Integra LifeSciences Corporation, Princeton, NJ). Complication rates based on the number of tissue expanders (TEs) were determined for each ADM type. Performance of multivariate logistic regression determined the impact of ADM type on complication risk after accounting for confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 726 patients (1054 TEs: 194 AlloDerm, 93 FlexHD, 767 SurgiMend) were included. The 3 cohorts differed in terms of mastectomy type (nipple-sparing: 23.5% of AlloDerm, 33.3% of FlexHD, 19.1% of SurgiMend, P = .038); ADM perforation (perforated: 94.8% of AlloDerm, 98.2% of FlexHD, 100% of SurgiMend, P < .001); and ADM size (AlloDerm: 153.2 cm2 [37.6], SurgiMend: 198.7 cm2 [10.4], FlexHD: 223.7 cm2 [37.9], P < .001). On univariate examination, no differences existed between ADM types for seroma, infection, exposure, malposition, or TE loss. Additionally, after adjustment for confounders with multivariate regression, no ADM type had higher odds of TE loss. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of prepectoral reconstruction patients, ADM type did not significantly affect the risk of complications. Additional prospective studies are warranted to better evaluate ADM choice for prepectoral breast reconstruction.

BREAST-Q REACT: Clinical Reference Values for the BREAST-Q in Post-mastectomy Breast Reconstruction Patients.

BACKGROUND: The BREAST-Q is the most commonly used patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for breast reconstruction research. However, clinical implementation of this PROM has been impeded by a lack of context for score interpretation. The aim of this study was to define reference values for the BREAST-Q at discrete timepoints following surgery, generating a tool for real-time score interpretation. METHODS: BREAST-Q scores were prospectively obtained in women who underwent implant or autologous post-mastectomy breast reconstruction preoperatively and for 2 years following surgery at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK). Descriptive statistics were used to create reference values for BREAST-Q satisfaction and quality-of-life subscales. Reference values were externally validated by comparing patient characteristics and BREAST-Q scores between the MSK and the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium (MROC) study cohorts. RESULTS: Overall, 3268 MSK patients and 2814 MROC patients were included for analysis. When MSK and MROC cohorts were compared for validation, there were some statistical differences in BREAST-Q scores; however, most of these differences did not meet the minimal clinically important difference of 4 points. Reference values were used to create the BREAST-Q Real-time Engagement and Communication Tool (REACT). CONCLUSIONS: Using a large cohort of patients, we have defined BREAST-Q reference values for post-mastectomy breast reconstruction patients for use in clinical practice. The BREAST-Q REACT will help breast reconstruction providers gauge patient wellbeing and satisfaction relative to the "average" breast reconstruction patient and determine which patients may benefit from additional intervention.

Breast Implant Safety: an Overview of Current Regulations and Screening Guidelines.

Breast implant surgery for cosmetic or reconstructive purposes is becoming increasingly common. While the devices used are regulated and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, all patients with breast implants require continued follow-up. Many patients will seek this care from their primary care providers, especially when follow-up with their plastic surgeon is difficult. It is vital that treating clinicians are knowledgeable about the history of breast implants, routine screening guidelines, and the recent breast implant "hot topics"-breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), connective tissue disease, and breast implant illness. This paper will provide the necessary information for primary care providers to appropriately counsel patients with breast implants to maintain not only their trust, but also their health.

Noninvasive Systemic Modalities for Prevention of Head and Neck Radiation-Associated Soft Tissue Injury: A Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Radiation-associated soft tissue injury is a potentially devastating complication for head and neck cancer patients. The damage can range from minor sequelae such as xerostomia, which requires frequent daily maintenance, to destructive degenerative processes such as osteoradionecrosis, which can contribute to flap failure and delay or reverse oral rehabilitation. Despite the need for effective radioprotectants, the literature remains sparse, primarily focused on interventions beyond the surgeon's control, such as maintenance of good oral hygiene or modulation of radiation dose. METHODS: This narrative review aggregates and explores noninvasive, systemic treatment modalities for prevention or amelioration of radiation-associated soft tissue injury. RESULTS: We highlighted nine modalities with the most clinical potential, which include amifostine, melatonin, palifermin, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, photobiomodulation, pentoxifylline-tocopherol-clodronate, pravastatin, transforming growth factor-ß modulators, and deferoxamine, and reviewed the benefits and limitations of each modality. Unfortunately, none of these modalities are supported by strong evidence for prophylaxis against radiation-associated soft tissue injury. CONCLUSION: While we cannot endorse any of these nine modalities for immediate clinical use, they may prove fruitful areas for further investigation.

Disparity Reduction in United States Breast Reconstruction: An Analysis From 2005-2017 Using 3 Nationwide Data Sets.

BACKGROUND: Following passage of the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act (WHCRA), a steady rise in breast reconstruction rates was reported; however, a recent update is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate longitudinal trends in breast reconstruction (BR) rates in the U.S. and relevant sociodemographic factors. METHODS: Mastectomy cases with/without BR from 2005 through 2017 were abstracted from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program, and National Cancer Database (NCDB). BR rates were examined using Poisson regression. Multivariable logistic regression analysis of NCDB data was used to identify predictors of reconstruction. Race and insurance distributions were evaluated over time. RESULTS: Of 1,554,381 mastectomy patients, 507,631 (32.7%) received BR. Annual reconstruction rates per 1000 mastectomies increased from 2005 to 2012 (NSQIP: Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) 1.077; SEER: 1.090; NCDB: 1.092) and stabilized from 2013 to 2017. NCDB data showed that patients who were younger (≤59 years), privately insured, had fewer comorbidities, and underwent contralateral prophylactic mastectomy were more likely to undergo BR (all p<0.001). Over time, the increase in BR rates was higher among Black (252.3%) and Asian (366.4%) patients than White patients (137.3%). BR rates increased more among Medicaid (418.6%) and Medicare (302.8%) patients than privately insured (125.3%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates stabilization in immediate BR rates over the last decade; reasons behind this stabilization are likely multifactorial. Disparities based on race and insurance type have decreased, with a more equitable distribution of BR rates.

Clinical Implications and Management of Non-BIA-ALCL Breast Implant Capsular Pathology.

SUMMARY: The breast implant capsule is a dynamic structure that forms following the implantation of a device. Although normally benign, increased awareness of breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) highlights that disease may arise from the capsule. BIA-ALCL presents as a late seroma or mass but explains few of the late seromas found in breast implant patients. To date, many of these seromas lack a clear cause and are often described as "idiopathic." Several benign and malignant breast implant capsular diseases can cause a late seroma or mass, including breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma. Similar to early reports of BIA-ALCL, these conditions are rare and largely limited to case reports or series. The purpose of this special topic is to present a narrative review highlighting capsular abnormalities that contribute to the formation of late seroma or mass in an attempt to broaden the differential diagnosis and help plastic surgeons identify the cause. Specifically, we review the presentation and management of BIA-ALCL, synovial metaplasia, capsular epithelialization, late hematoma, double capsule, breast cancer, squamous cell carcinoma, mesenchymal tumor, and B-cell lymphoma. Although rare, plastic surgeons should consider these capsular conditions as causes of late seromas and masses. Usually, these conditions may be diagnosed by following the National Comprehensive Cancer Network screening guidelines for BIA-ALCL. Thorough evaluation and workup of late seromas and masses may lead to improved characterization of these rare breast implant capsular conditions and improve our understanding of their pathophysiology and management.

Reducing Opioid Overprescribing through Procedure-specific Prescribing Guidelines.

Despite advances in opioid-sparing pain management, postdischarge opioid overprescribing in plastic surgery remains an issue. Procedure-specific prescribing protocols have been implemented successfully in other surgical specialties but not broadly in plastic surgery. This study examined the efficacy of procedure-specific prescribing guidelines for reducing postdischarge opioid overprescribing. Methods: A total of 561 plastic surgery patients were evaluated retrospectively after a prescribing guideline, which recommended postdischarge prescription amounts based on the type of operation, was introduced in July 2020. Prescription and postdischarge opioid consumption amounts before (n = 428) and after (n = 133) guideline implementation were compared. Patient satisfaction and prescription frequency of nonopioid analgesia were also compared. Results: The average number of opioid pills per prescription decreased by 25% from 19.3 (27.4 OME) to 15.0 (22.7 OME; P = 0.001) after guideline implementation, with no corresponding decrease in the average number of postdischarge opioid pills consumed [10.6 (15.1 OME) to 8.2 (12.4 OME); P = 0.147]. Neither patient satisfaction with pain management (9.6-9.6; P > 0.99) nor communication (9.6-9.5; P > 0.99) changed. The rate of opioid-only prescription regimens decreased from 17.9% to 7.6% (P = 0.01), and more patients were prescribed at least two nonopioid analgesics (27.5% to 42.9%; P = 0.003). The rate of scheduled acetaminophen prescription, in particular, increased (54.7% to 71.4%; P = 0.002). Conclusions: A procedure-specific prescribing model is a straight-forward intervention to promote safer opioid-prescribing practices in plastic surgery. Its usage in clinical practice may lead to more appropriate opioid prescribing.

A Personalized Opioid Prescription Model for Predicting Postoperative Discharge Opioid Needs.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overprescribing after surgery is common. There is currently no universal predictive tool available to accurately anticipate postdischarge opioid need in a patient-specific manner. This study examined the efficacy of a patient-specific opioid prescribing framework for estimating postdischarge opioid consumption. METHODS: A total of 149 patients were evaluated for a single-center retrospective cohort study of plastic and reconstructive surgery patients. Patients with length of stay of 2 to 8 days and quantifiable inpatient opioid consumption (n = 116) were included. Each patient's daily postoperative inpatient opioid consumption was used to generate a personalized logarithmic regression model to estimate postdischarge opioid need. The validity of the personalized opioid prescription (POP) model was tested through comparison with actual postdischarge opioid consumption reported by patients 4 weeks after surgery. The accuracy of the POP model was compared with two other opioid prescribing models. RESULTS: The POP model had the strongest association (R2 = 0.899; P < 0.0001) between model output and postdischarge opioid consumption when compared to a procedure-based (R2 = 0.226; P = 0.025) or a 24-hour (R2 = 0.152; P = 0.007) model. Accuracy of the POP model was unaffected by age, gender identity, procedure type, or length of stay. Odds of persistent use at 4 weeks increased, with a postdischarge estimated opioid need at a rate of 1.16 per 37.5 oral morphine equivalents (P = 0.010; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.30). CONCLUSIONS: The POP model accurately estimates postdischarge opioid consumption and risk of developing persistent use in plastic surgery patients. Use of the POP model in clinical practice may lead to more appropriate and personalized opioid prescribing.

Paravertebral Blocks in Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: Propensity-Matched Analysis of Opioid Consumption and Patient Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The paravertebral block (PVB) is an adjunctive perioperative pain control method for patients undergoing breast reconstruction that may improve perioperative pain control and reduce narcotic use. This study determined the efficacy of preoperative PVBs for perioperative pain management in patients undergoing tissue expander breast reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent tissue expander breast reconstruction from December of 2017 to September of 2019. Two patients with PVBs were matched using propensity scoring to one no-block patient. Perioperative analgesic use, pain severity scores on days 2 to 10 after discharge, and BREAST-Q Physical Well-Being scores before surgery and at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months after surgery were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The propensity-matched cohort consisted of 471 patients (314 PVB and 157 no block). The PVB group used significantly fewer morphine milligram equivalents than the no-block group (53.7 versus 69.8; P < 0.001). Average daily postoperative pain severity scores were comparable, with a maximum difference of 0.3 points on a 0-point to 4-point scale. BREAST-Q Physical Well-Being scores were significantly higher for the PVB group than the no-block group at 6 weeks after surgery (60.6 versus 51.0; P = 0.015) but did not differ significantly at 2 weeks or 3 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: PVBs may help reduce perioperative opioid requirements but did not reduce pain scores after discharge when used as part of an expander-based reconstruction perioperative pain management protocol. Continued research should examine additional or alternative regional block procedures as well as financial cost and potential long-term impact of PVBs. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.