Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Reduces Opioid Consumption and Pain After Mastectomy: A Head-to-Head Comparison With Submuscular Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Acute pain after mastectomy is increased with concurrent breast reconstruction. One postulated advantage of prepectoral breast reconstruction is less postoperative pain; however, no comparisons to partial submuscular reconstruction have been made to date. Here, we examined the postoperative pain experienced between patients with prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders from 2012 to 2019 by a single plastic surgeon. Patient demographics, surgical details, and anesthetic techniques were evaluated, and our primary outcome compared postoperative opioid usage between prepectoral and subpectoral reconstructions. Our secondary outcome compared pain scores between techniques. RESULTS: A total of 211 subpectoral and 117 prepectoral reconstruction patients were included for analysis. Patients with subpectoral reconstructions had higher postoperative opioid usage (80.0 vs 45.0 oral morphine equivalents, P < 0.001). Subpectoral patients also recorded higher maximum pain scores compared with prepectoral reconstructions while admitted (7 of 10 vs 5 of 10, P < 0.004). Multivariable linear regression suggests that mastectomy type and subpectoral reconstruction were significant contributors to postoperative opioid use (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Prepectoral breast reconstruction was associated with less postoperative opioid consumption and lower postoperative pain scores as compared with subpectoral reconstruction, when controlling for other surgical and anesthesia factors. Future randomized controlled trials are warranted to study how postoperative pain and chronic pain are influenced by the location of prosthesis placement in implant-based postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

A Critical Analysis of Prosthetic Augmentation of Autologous Microvascular Breast Reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: The combined approach using both an implant and autologous tissue for breast reconstruction has become more common over the last 10 years. We sought to provide a systematic review and outcomes analysis of this technique. METHODS: We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library database to identify studies that described implant augmentation of autologous flaps for breast reconstruction. The references of selected articles were also reviewed to identify any additional pertinent articles. RESULTS: We identified 11 articles, which included 230 patients and 378 flaps. Implants used ranged in size from 90 to 510 cc, with an average size of 198 cc. Implants were more frequently placed at the time of autologous reconstruction and in the subpectoral plane. There were no total flap losses, and partial flap loss occurred in 3 patients (1%). There were no cases of venous or arterial thrombosis and no early return to the operating room for flap compromise. Eight implants (2%) were lost because of infection or extrusion, and capsular contracture occurred in 9 breasts (3%). When stratified by the timing of implant placement (immediate vs delayed), there were no significant differences in any postoperative outcomes except the immediate group had a higher infection rate. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for women to be candidates for autologous tissue breast reconstruction can be expanded by adding an implant underneath the flap. We found the overall flap loss rate is comparable with standard autologous flap reconstruction, and the implant loss rate is lower than that in patients who undergo prosthetic reconstruction alone.

Machine learning improves prediction of postoperative outcomes after gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) approaches have become increasingly popular in predicting surgical outcomes. However, it is unknown whether they are superior to traditional statistical methods such as logistic regression (LR). This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the performance of ML vs LR models in predicting postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. METHODS: A systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was performed through December 2022. The primary outcome was the discriminatory performance of ML vs LR models as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). A meta-analysis was then performed using a random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 62 LR models and 143 ML models were included across 38 studies. On average, the best-performing ML models had a significantly higher AUC than the LR models (ΔAUC, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.04-0.09; P < .001). Similarly, on average, the best-performing ML models had a significantly higher logit (AUC) than the LR models (Δlogit [AUC], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.23-0.58; P < .001). Approximately half of studies (44%) were found to have a low risk of bias. Upon a subset analysis of only low-risk studies, the difference in logit (AUC) remained significant (ML vs LR, Δlogit [AUC], 0.40; 95% CI, 0.14-0.66; P = .009). CONCLUSION: We found a significant improvement in discriminatory ability when using ML over LR algorithms in predicting postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing GI surgery. Subsequent efforts should establish standardized protocols for both developing and reporting studies using ML models and explore the practical implementation of these models.

Opioid Use following Open versus Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Population Study.

Open (OCTR) and endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) are both effective treatments for carpal tunnel syndrome, with similar outcomes and complication rates. Given the opioid epidemic, it is important to consider how surgical modality impacts narcotic use. We compared narcotic use after OCTR and ECTR to identify trends and risk factors for prolonged postoperative use. METHODS: We utilized the PearlDiver database to identify patients who underwent OCTR and ECTR between 2008 and 2015. Patients with opioid use were analyzed for trends. Early refills, prolonged postoperative opioid use, and new persistent opioid use were defined by time periods relating to the date of surgery. Age, gender, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and surgery type (open versus endoscopic) were analyzed as predictors for opioid use. RESULTS: A total of 29,583 patients were included: 4125 (14%) ECTR and 25,458 (86%) OCTR. Significantly more OCTR patients filled perioperative prescriptions (62% versus 60%), and the OCTR group filled higher quantities of perioperative opioids (411 OME versus 379 OME). Patients in the OCTR group were also significantly more likely to obtain early refills and to have prolonged postoperative use. There was no difference in the rate of new persistent use. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ECTR, patients who underwent OCTR filled higher quantities of opioids in the perioperative period, were more likely to obtain early refills, and were more likely to have prolonged postoperative use. These findings suggest either a lower opioid requirement after ECTR or a lower perceived requirement reflected in the difference in prescribing habits between techniques.