The Role of Reconstruction on Desmoid Tumor Recurrence: A Systematic Review and Technical Considerations.

BACKGROUND: Desmoid tumors occur throughout the body, presenting as aggressive, locally invasive lesions that can impede quality of life. Many controversies remain regarding the optimal surgical treatment of desmoid. This article presents a systematic review and meta-analysis on surgical management, focusing on risk of recurrence and the utility of reconstruction within this unique patient population. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to search for articles. The clinical course of patients diagnosed with desmoid tumors and treated by our institution's multidisciplinary team was retrospectively reviewed over a 13-year period. Meta-analysis study findings were compared with our cohort. RESULTS: From the systematic review, 10 studies with level of evidence III were found, which resulted in 981 patients. Twenty patients from our institution met the inclusion criteria for our study. In both our study cohort and the pooled results, recurrence was significantly higher in patients with positive microscopic margin after resection. In our study cohort, patients with recurrence had higher rates of positive margins compared with those without recurrence (83.3% vs 7.1%, P = 0.004), whereas the pooled study showed a difference of margin positivity of 50% vs 40% ( P = 0.01). No patients who underwent reconstruction in our study cohort had a recurrence during the study period. CONCLUSION: In both our cohort and pooled results, recurrence was significantly higher in patients with positive margins after initial resection. Reconstruction was not found to be a risk factor for recurrence. Reconstruction following desmoid tumor resection should be considered a viable option if a large and aggressive resection is required to obtain negative margins.

Size and Perception of Facial Features with Selfie Photographs, and Their Implication in Rhinoplasty and Facial Plastic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients increasingly use photographs taken with a front-facing smartphone camera-"selfies"-to discuss their goals with a plastic surgeon. The purpose of this study was to quantify changes in size and perception of facial features when taking a selfie compared to the gold standard of clinical photography. METHODS: Thirty volunteers took three series of photographs. A 12-inch and 18-inch series were taken with a front-facing smartphone camera, and the 5-foot clinical photography series was taken with a digital single-lens reflex camera. Afterward, subjects filled out the FACE-Q inventory, once when viewing their 12-inch selfies and once when viewing their clinical photographs. Measurements were taken of the nose, lip, chin, and facial width. RESULTS: Nasal length was, on average, 6.4 percent longer in 12-inch selfies compared to clinical photography, and 4.3 percent longer in 18-inch selfies compared to clinical photography. The alar base width did not change significantly in either set of selfies compared to clinical photography. The alar base to facial width ratio represents the size of the nose in relation to the face. This ratio decreased 10.8 percent when comparing 12-inch selfies to clinical photography (p < 0.0001) and decreased 7.8 percent when comparing 18-inch selfies to clinical photography (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study quantifies the change in facial feature size/perception seen in previous camera-to-subject distance studies. With the increasing popularity of front-facing smartphone photographs, these data allow for a more precise conversation between the surgeon and the patient. In addition, the authors' findings provide data for manufacturers to improve the societal impact of smartphone cameras. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, III.

Rodeo Thumb: To Replant or Not.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated patient-reported outcomes after surgical treatment of rodeo thumb amputation to guide clinical decision-making. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for rodeo thumb amputations from 2009 to 2019. Patient-reported outcomes were collected and compared by injury level, age, and treatment. Two-sided t test was used to compare continuous variables, and Pearson chi-square test was used to compare categorical data. RESULTS: The study included 37 patients. Patients with interphalangeal injuries treated with replantation had Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire scores similar to those treated with amputation (1 versus 8; p = 0.07). There was no significant difference in percentage of patients with similar or better roping ability after treatment (40 percent versus 79 percent; p = 0.26), and similar percentages were satisfied (80 percent versus 71 percent; p = 1.00). Patients with metacarpophalangeal injuries treated with replantation and those treated with amputation had similar questionnaire scores (7 versus 10; p = 0.47). Both groups had similar roping ability after treatment (67 percent versus 56 percent; p = 1.00), and there was no statistically significant difference in satisfaction (79 percent versus 44 percent; p = 0.34). Pediatric patients had questionnaire scores similar to those of adults (6 versus 8; p = 0.42). A significantly higher percentage of pediatric patients had similar roping ability following injury than adults (100 percent versus 54 percent; p = 0.02). Most patients in both groups were satisfied (89 percent versus 61 percent; p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: For both interphalangeal and metacarpophalangeal injuries, patient-reported outcomes were similar regardless of treatment. Children were able to return to roping and perform at a similar or higher level at a greater rate than adults, but had similar questionnaire scores and satisfaction.