A Multi-institutional Analysis of a Textbook Outcome Among Patients Undergoing Microvascular Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Individual outcomes may not accurately reflect the quality of perioperative care. Textbook outcomes (TOs) are composite metrics that provide a comprehensive evaluation of hospital performance and surgical quality. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and predictors of TOs in a multi-institutional cohort of patients who underwent breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps. METHODS: For autologous reconstruction, a TO was previously defined as a procedure without intraoperative complications, reoperation, infection requiring intravenous antibiotics, readmission, mortality, systemic complications, operative duration ≤12 hours for bilateral and ≤10 hours for unilateral/stacked reconstruction, and length of stay (LOS) ≤5 days. We investigated associations between patient-level factors and achieving a TO using multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 1000 patients, most (73.2%) met a TO. The most common reasons for deviation from a TO were reoperation (9.6%), prolonged operative time (9.5%), and prolonged LOS (9.2%). On univariate analysis, tobacco use, obesity, widowed/divorced marital status, and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy or bilateral reconstruction were associated with a lower likelihood of TOs (P < 0.05). After adjustment, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (odds ratio [OR], 5.71; P = 0.029) and hormonal therapy (OR, 1.53; P = 0.050) were associated with a higher likelihood of TOs; higher body mass index (OR, 0.91; P = <0.001) was associated with a lower likelihood. CONCLUSION: Approximately 30% of patients did not achieve a TO, and the likelihood of achieving a TO was influenced by patient and procedural factors. Future studies should investigate how this metric may be used to evaluate patient and hospital-level performance to improve the quality of care in reconstructive surgery.

Free fibula mandible reconstruction for osteoradionecrosis is more challenging than for primary cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the mandible is an unfortunate potential sequela of radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. In advanced cases of ORN, mandibulectomy, and free fibula flap reconstruction are required. We hypothesized that patients undergoing fibula free flap reconstruction and mandibulectomy for ORN pose unique challenges and experience more complications than patients undergoing fibula free flaps after oncologic mandibulectomy. METHODS: After IRB approval, we created a database of all free fibula flaps for mandible reconstruction from April 2005 through February 2019. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for patient and surgical characteristics and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Four-hundred seventy-nine patients met the inclusion criteria (168 ORN vs. 311 non-ORN patients). Propensity-matching was performed based on age, BMI, smoking status, preoperative chemotherapy, and virtual surgery planning use, which yielded 159 patients in each group. ORN patients received more double-skin-island fibula flaps than non-OR patients (20.8% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.001). Recipient artery other than the facial artery was utilized more commonly in ORN patients (42.1% vs. 17.0%, p < 0.001). In the unmatched cohort, ORN patients had higher rates of delayed wound healing (26.2% vs. 16.8%, p = 0.01) and surgical site infections (21.4% vs. 13.2%, p = 0.02). Rates of flap loss, return to the operating room, hematoma, operative time, and length of stay were similar between the groups. On logistic regression analysis, osteoradionecrosis was an independent risk factor for delayed wound healing. CONCLUSION: Based on these data, mandibular reconstruction with fibula flaps for osteoradionecrosis appears more complicated than mandible reconstruction following de novo cancer resection. Surgeons should anticipate employing two skin islands for intraoral and extraoral resurfacing, utilizing unconventional recipient vessels, and managing the delayed wound healing that ensues more commonly than non-ORN patients.

Neurotized profunda artery perforator flap for subtotal tongue reconstruction - Prospective case series.

BACKGROUND: Total or subtotal glossectomy defects cause significant functional deficits in swallowing and speech and subsequently impair patients' quality of life (QOL). Recently, the profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap has emerged as a potential alternative for reconstructing extensive glossectomy defects. While previous studies assessing recovery of neurotized anterolateral thigh (ALT) flaps in head and neck reconstruction reported superior sensory recovery, improved swallow function, and improved overall patient satisfaction in patients with neurotized flaps vs. non-neurotized ALT flap reconstruction, PAP flap neurotization has not been described and systematically assessed in head and neck patients. METHODS: Six patients underwent subtotal tongue reconstruction with neurotized PAP flaps at the authors' institution from May 2022 until August 2023. A branch of the posterior femoral cutaneous nerve of the PAP flap was coaptated to the lingual nerve. Two-point discrimination, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament, pain, and temperature assessments were conducted at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively on the neo-tongue. The MD Anderson speech and deglutition scales and the EORTC-QLQ-H&N35 were used to record functional outcomes and QOL. RESULTS: The mean age was 69 ± 4 years, and the mean body mass index was 25 ± 7 kg/m2. Neo-tongue median 2-point discrimination at the tip improved from >10 mm at 3 months to 6 mm at 12 months. All patients had protective pain and temperature perception at the neo-tongue tip at the 6-month follow-up. Speech and swallowing functions were similar at the 12-month follow-up to data on neurotized ALT flaps from literature. No neuropathic pain was reported at the donor site at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first case series of PAP flap neurotization in head and neck patients, suggesting potential functional advantages with minimal donor-site morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V Case Series.

No Skin Paddle, No Problem: Burying Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Flaps in the Immediate Setting is Safe in Select Patient Populations.

BACKGROUND: In appropriately selected patients, it may be possible to fully bury breast free flaps deep to the mastectomy skin flaps. Because this practice forgoes the incorporation of a monitoring skin paddle for the flap, and thus limits the ability for physical exam, it may be associated with an increased risk of flap loss or other perfusion-related complications, such as fat necrosis. We hypothesized that fully de-epithelialized breast free flaps were not associated with an increased complication rate and reduced the need for future revision surgery. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review of 206 deep inferior epigastric artery (DIEP) flaps in 142 patients was performed between June 2016 and September 2021. Flaps were grouped into buried or nonburied categories based on the absence or presence of a monitoring paddle. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed postoperatively using the BREAST-Q breast reconstruction module. Electronic medical record data included demographics, comorbidities, flap characteristics, complications, and revision surgery. RESULTS: The buried flap patients (N = 46) had a lower median body mass index (26.9 vs 30.3, p = 0.04) and a lower rate of hypertension (19.5 vs. 37.5%, p = 0.04) compared with nonburied flap patients (N = 160). Burying flaps was more likely to be adopted in skin-sparing mastectomy or nipple-sparing mastectomy (p = 0.001) and in an immediate or a delayed-immediate fashion (p = 0.009). There was one flap loss in the nonburied group; complication rates were similar. There was a significantly greater revision rate in the nonburied flap patients (92 vs. 70%; p = 0.002). Buried flap patients exhibited a greater satisfaction with breasts (84.5 ± 13.4 vs. 73.9 ± 21.4; p = 0.04) and sexual satisfaction (73.1 ± 22.4 vs. 53.7 ± 29.7; p = 0.01) compared with nonburied flap patients. CONCLUSION: Burying breast free flaps in appropriately selected patients does not appear to have a higher complication rate when compared with flaps with an externalized monitoring paddle. Furthermore, this modification may be associated with a better immediate aesthetic outcome and improved patient satisfaction, as evidenced by a lower rate of revision surgery and superior BREAST-Q scores among buried DIEP flaps.

Premastectomy Radiotherapy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Premastectomy radiotherapy (PreMRT) is a new treatment sequence to avoid the adverse effects of radiotherapy on the final breast reconstruction while achieving the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction (IMBR). Objective: To evaluate outcomes among patients who received PreMRT and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a phase 2 single-center randomized clinical trial conducted between August 3, 2018, and August 2, 2022, evaluating the feasibility and safety of PreMRT and RNI (including internal mammary lymph nodes). Patients with cT0-T3, N0-N3b breast cancer and a recommendation for radiotherapy were eligible. Intervention: This trial evaluated outcomes after PreMRT followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (40.05 Gy/15 fractions) or conventionally fractionated (50 Gy/25 fractions) RNI. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was reconstructive failure, defined as complete autologous flap loss. Demographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected, and associations between multiple variables and outcomes were evaluated. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis. Results: Fifty patients were enrolled. Among 49 evaluable patients, the median age was 48 years (range, 31-72 years), and 46 patients (94%) received neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Twenty-five patients received 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the breast and 45 Gy in 25 fractions to regional nodes, and 24 patients received 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions to the breast and 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions to regional nodes, including internal mammary lymph nodes. Forty-eight patients underwent mastectomy with IMBR, at a median of 23 days (IQR, 20-28.5 days) after radiotherapy. Forty-one patients had microvascular autologous flap reconstruction, 5 underwent latissimus dorsi pedicled flap reconstruction, and 2 had tissue expander placement. There were no complete autologous flap losses, and 1 patient underwent tissue expander explantation. Eight of 48 patients (17%) had mastectomy skin flap necrosis of the treated breast, of whom 1 underwent reoperation. During follow-up (median, 29.7 months [range, 10.1-65.2 months]), there were no locoregional recurrences or distant metastasis. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found PreMRT and RNI followed by mastectomy and microvascular autologous flap IMBR to be feasible and safe. Based on these results, a larger randomized clinical trial of hypofractionated vs conventionally fractionated PreMRT has been started (NCT05774678). Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02912312.

Impact of adjuvant radiochemotherapy on free flap volume in head and neck reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist regarding the effect of adjuvant radiochemotherapy on free flap volume in head and neck reconstruction. However, an adequate free flap volume is an important predictor of functional and patient-reported outcomes in head and neck reconstruction. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of 6710 abstracts were screened, and 36 full-text papers were reviewed. Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were used to extract data for this analysis. RESULTS: A meta-analysis of 14 two-arm studies comparing the impact of adjuvant radiotherapy versus no adjuvant radiotherapy was performed. The main analysis revealed that 6 months postoperatively, irradiated flaps showed a significant reduction of volume (average, 9.4%) compared to nonirradiated flaps. The average interpolated pooled flap volumes 6 months postoperatively were 76.4% in irradiated flaps and 81.8% in nonirradiated flaps. After a median postoperative follow-up of 12 months, the total flap volume was 62.6% for irradiated flaps and 76% for nonirradiated flaps. Four studies reported that chemotherapy had no significant impact on free flap volume. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to nonirradiated flaps, irradiated flaps were significantly reduced in volume (range, 5% to 15.5%). Clinicians should take this into account when planning the surgical reconstruction of head and neck defects. Conducting large-scale prospective studies with standardized protocols and well-defined follow-up measurements could contribute to defining the ideal, personalized free flap volume for optimal function and patient-reported outcomes.