ABSTRACT
The conventional approach to harvest of the gracilis muscle flap necessitates a medial thigh incision that is often related to several donor site complications. In this report we describe the robotic harvest of the free gracilis muscle flap in order to reduce the morbidity associated with the open incision. Through three ports, the robotic system (Da Vinci Xi, Intuitive Surgical) enables precise dissection of the gracilis muscle, the vascular pedicle, and the obturator nerve; thus, enhancing surgical control, optimizing visualization through magnification, aiding in detailed vascular pedicle dissection and minimizing human error. We believe that the technique of totally robotic harvest of the free gracilis muscle flap, herein introduced, is a feasible and effective approach, and confers specific advantages over traditional harvest technique.
Subject(s)
Gracilis Muscle , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Gracilis Muscle/transplantation , Surgical Flaps/blood supply , Thigh/surgery , Dissection , Muscle, Skeletal/transplantationSubject(s)
Frailty , Mammaplasty , Humans , Aged , Frailty/complications , Frail Elderly , Treatment Outcome , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is associated with altered cosmetic outcomes and higher complication rates in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). Conventional wisdom suggests that muscle coverage is somewhat protective against PMRT-related complications. In this study, the authors compared surgical outcomes in patients who underwent two-stage prepectoral versus subpectoral IBR in the setting of PMRT. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent mastectomy and PMRT with two-stage IBR from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was breast-related complications, including device infection; the secondary outcome was device explantation. RESULTS: The authors identified 179 reconstructions (101 prepectoral and 78 subpectoral) in 172 patients with a mean follow-up time of 39.7 ± 14.4 months. There were no differences between the prepectoral and subpectoral reconstructions in rates of breast-related complications (26.7% and 21.8%, respectively; P = 0.274), device infection (18.8% and 15.4%, respectively; P = 0.307), skin flap necrosis (5.0% and 1.3%, respectively; P = 0.232), or device explantation (20.8% and 14.1%, respectively; P = 0.117). In adjusted models, compared with prepectoral device placement, subpectoral device placement was not associated with a lower risk of breast-related complications [hazard ratio (HR), 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41 to 1.36], device infection (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.49), or device explantation (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.19). CONCLUSIONS: Device placement plane was not predictive of complication rates in IBR in the setting of PMRT. Two-stage prepectoral IBR provides safe long-term outcomes with acceptable postoperative complication rates comparable to those with subpectoral IBR, even in the setting of PMRT. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Retrospective Studies , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/prevention & controlABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with higher risk of complications following breast reconstruction, but its impact on long-term surgical and patient-reported outcomes has not been investigated. We examined the association of the five-item modified frailty index (MFI) score with long-term surgical and patient-reported outcomes in autologous breast reconstruction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction between January 2016 and April 2022. Primary outcome was any flap-related complication. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes and predictors of complications in the frail cohort. RESULTS: We identified 1640 reconstructions (mean follow-up 24.2 ± 19.2 months). In patients with MFI ≥ 2, the odds of surgical [odds ratio (OR) 2.13, p = 0.023] and medical (OR 17.02, p < 0.001) complications were higher than in nonfrail patients. We found no significant difference in satisfaction with the breast (p = 0.287), psychosocial well-being (p = 0.119), or sexual well-being (p = 0.314) according to MFI score. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was an independent predictor of infection (OR 3.70, p = 0.002). Tobacco use (OR 7.13, p = 0.002) and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (OR 2.36, p = 0.014) were independent predictors of wound dehiscence. Dependent functional status (OR 2.36, p = 0.007) and immediate reconstruction (compared with delayed reconstruction; OR 3.16, p = 0.026) were independent predictors of skin flap necrosis. Dependent functional status was also independently associated with higher odds of reoperation (OR 2.64, p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Frailty is associated with higher risk of complications in breast reconstruction, but there is no significant difference in long-term patient-reported outcomes. MFI should be considered in breast reconstruction to improve outcomes in high-risk frail patients.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Frailty , Mammaplasty , Humans , Aged , Female , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Frailty/complications , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Frail Elderly , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Mammaplasty/psychology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Treatment Outcome , Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresABSTRACT
In recent years, robotic surgery has rapidly expanded to improve surgical outcomes in a variety of surgical subspecialties. Although plastic surgery has taken longer to integrate robotic surgery into practice, the advantages of robotic-assisted surgery, including improved visualization and resolution, minimally invasive approaches, and the ability to surpass human precision and scale, have driven its more recent adoption into plastic surgery. Currently, procedures performed with robotic assistance that are considered part of the continuum of surgical treatment of breast cancer include robotic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy, reconstruction with the robotic latissimus dorsi flap or the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap, and robotic microsurgery for the flap anastomosis and/or the surgical treatment of lymphedema. The authors provide an overview of robotic surgery and how it has been integrated into the field of plastic surgery, as well as a review of the most common procedures within the field where robotic assistance can be incorporated: nipple-sparing mastectomy, robotic latissimus flap, robotic deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction, and microvascular anastomoses.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: While many studies evaluated outcomes of abdominal wall reconstruction with biologic mesh, long-term data is lacking. In this study, we sought to analyze the outcomes of complex AWR with biologic mesh in a robust cohort of patients with a mean follow up of 8 years. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal study of AWR patients from 2005 to 2019. Hernia recurrence was the primary outcome, and surgical site occurrence was the secondary outcome. Predictive/protective factors were identified using a Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: We identified 109 consecutive patients who met the inclusion criteria. Patient's mean (± SD) age was 57.5 ± 11.8 years, mean body mass index was 30.7 ± 7.2 kg/m2, and mean follow-up time was 96.2 ± 15.9 months. Fifty-six percent had clean defects, 34% had clean-contaminated defects, and 10% had contaminated/infected defects. Patients had a mean defect size of 261 ± 199.6 cm2 and mean mesh size of 391.3 ± 160.2 cm2. Nineteen patients (17.4%) developed HR at the final follow-up date. Obesity was independently associated with a four-fold higher risk of HR (hazard ratio, 3.98; 95%CI, 1.34 to 14.60, p = 0.02). SSOs were identified in 24.8% of patients. A prior hernia repair was associated with a three-fold higher risk of SSOs (Odds ratio, 3.13; 95%CI, 1.10 to 8.94, p = 0.03). No patient developed mesh infection. CONCLUSION: These longitudinal data demonstrate that complex AWR with biologic mesh provides long-term durable outcomes with acceptable HR and SSO rates despite high contamination levels, patients complexity, and large defect size.
Subject(s)
Abdominal Wall , Biological Products , Hernia, Ventral , Humans , Middle Aged , Aged , Abdominal Wall/surgery , Hernia, Ventral/surgery , Follow-Up Studies , Longitudinal Studies , Surgical Mesh , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective Studies , Logistic Models , Herniorrhaphy , RecurrenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Mastectomy skin flap necrosis (MSFN) is a common complication following mastectomy that causes significant distress to patients and physicians and also compromises oncologic, surgical, and quality-of-life outcomes. OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the long-term outcomes of MSFN following implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and determine the rates and predictors of post-MSFN complications. METHODS: This was a 20-year analysis of consecutive adult (>18 years) patients who developed MSFN following mastectomy and IBR from January 2001 to January 2021. Multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with post-MSFN complications. RESULTS: We identified 148 reconstructions, with a mean follow-up time of 86.6 ± 52.9 months. The mean time from reconstruction to MSFN was 13.3 ± 10.4 days, and most cases (n = 84, 56.8%) were full-thickness injuries. Most cases (63.5%) were severe, 14.9% were moderate, and 21.6% were mild. Forty-six percent (n = 68) developed a breast-related complication, with infection being the most common (24%). An independent predictor of overall complications was longer time from reconstruction to MSFN (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; P = .040). Aging was an independent predictor of overall complications (OR, 1.86; P = .038); infection (OR, 1.72; P = .005); and dehiscence (OR, 6.18; P = .037). Independent predictors of dehiscence were longer interval from reconstruction to MSFN (OR, 3.23; P = .018) and larger expander/implant size (OR, 1.49; P = .024). Independent predictors of explantation were larger expander/implant size (OR, 1.20; P = .006) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (OR, 5.61; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: MSFN is associated with high risk of complications following IBR. Awareness of the timing and severity of MSFN and the predictors of post-MSFN complications is crucial for guiding evidence-based decision-making and improving outcomes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The impact of obesity on outcomes of prepectoral vs subpectoral implant-based reconstruction (IBR) is not well-established. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to assess the surgical and patient-reported outcomes of prepectoral vs subpectoral IBR. The authors hypothesized that obese patients would have similar outcomes regardless of device plane. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of obese patients who underwent 2-stage IBR from January 2017 to December 2019. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of any breast-related complication; the secondary endpoint was device explantation. RESULTS: The authors identified a total of 284 reconstructions (184 prepectoral, 100 subpectoral) in 209 patients. Subpectoral reconstruction demonstrated higher rates of overall complications (50% vs 37%, P = .047) and device explantation (25% vs 12.5%, P = .008) than prepectoral reconstruction. In multivariable regression, subpectoral reconstruction was associated with higher risk of infection (hazard ratio [HR], 1.65; P = .022) and device explantation (HR, 1.97; P = .034). Subgroup analyses demonstrated significantly higher rates of complications and explantation in the subpectoral group in those with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 and BMI ≥40. The authors found no significant differences in mean scores for satisfaction with the breast (41.57 ± 13.19 vs 45.50 ± 11.91, P = .469), psychosocial well-being (39.43 ± 11.23 vs 39.30 ± 12.49, P = .915), and sexual well-being (17.17 ± 7.83 vs 17.0 ± 9.03, P = .931) between subpectoral and prepectoral reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Prepectoral reconstruction was associated with significantly decreased overall complications, infections, and device explantation in obese patients compared with subpectoral reconstruction. Prepectoral reconstruction provides superior outcomes to subpectoral reconstruction with comparable patient-reported outcomes.
Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Reoperation , Obesity/complications , Retrospective Studies , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/etiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The skin ischemia and necrosis (SKIN) score was introduced to standardize the assessment of mastectomy skin flap necrosis (MSFN) severity and the need for reoperation. We evaluated the association between the SKIN score and the long-term postoperative outcomes of MSFN after mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who developed MSFN following mastectomy and IBR from January 2001 to January 2021. Primary outcome was breast-related complications following MSFN. Secondary outcomes were 30-day readmission, operating room (OR) debridement, and reoperation. Study outcomes were correlated with the SKIN composite score. RESULTS: We identified 299 reconstructions in 273 consecutive patients with mean follow-up time of 111.8±3.9 months. Most patients had a composite SKIN score of B2 (25.0%, n=13), followed by D2 (17.3%) and C2 (15.4%). We found no significant difference in rates of OR debridement (p=0.347), 30-day readmission (p=0.167), any complication (p=0.492), or reoperation for a complication (p=0.189) based on the SKIN composite score. The composite skin score was a poor predictor of reoperation, with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.56. A subgroup analysis in patients who underwent implant-based reconstruction revealed no difference in rates of OR debridement (p=0.986), 30-day readmission (p=0.530), any complication (p=0.492), or reoperation for a complication (p=0.655) based on the SKIN composite score. CONCLUSION: The SKIN score was a poor predictor for postoperative MSFN outcomes and reoperation. An individualized risk-assessment tool that incorporates both the anatomical appearance of the breast, imaging data, and patient-level risk factors is needed.
ABSTRACT
Patients undergoing plastic surgery of the breasts often communicate their size expectations as a brassiere cup size. However, multiple factors may cause a miscommunication between the surgeon and patient when brassiere cup size is used as a measure of results. The aim of this study was to determine the degree of agreement between disclosed and estimated brassiere cup size and also interrater agreement. Methods: Three-dimensional (3D) scans of 32 subjects were evaluated by 10 plastic surgeons estimating cup size using the American brassiere system. The surgeons were blinded to all parameters, including the 3D surface software-derived volume measures of the Vectra scan. The 3D scans of the anterior torsos were viewed. The plastic surgeons' estimations were compared with the cup sizes stated by the subjects (disclosed cup size), using simple and weighted Kappa statistics. Results: Agreement between the estimated and disclosed brassiere sizes was only slight (0.1479 ± 0.0605) using a simple Kappa analysis. Even when a Fleiss-Cohen-weighted comparison was used, only moderate agreement (0.6231 ± 0.0589) was found. The interrater agreement intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.705. Rater accuracy varied. The percentage of time spent in cosmetic practice and gender were not significantly correlated with accuracy. Conclusions: Agreement between cup size disclosed by subjects and estimates by plastic surgeons was low. A miscommunication between the surgeon and patient may occur when using brassiere sizes to communicate wishes and estimates in procedures that involve changes in breast volume.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Skin-preserving, staged, microvascular, breast reconstruction often is preferred in patients requiring postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) but may lead to complications. We compared the long-term surgical and patient-reported outcomes between skin-preserving and delayed microvascular breast reconstruction with and without PMRT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy and microvascular breast reconstruction between January 2016 and April 2022. The primary outcome was any flap-related complication. The secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes and tissue-expander complications. RESULTS: We identified 1002 reconstructions (672 delayed; 330 skin-preserving) in 812 patients. Mean follow-up was 24.2 ± 19.3 months. PMRT was required in 564 reconstructions (56.3%). In the non-PMRT group, skin-preserving reconstruction was independently associated with shorter hospital stay (ß - 0.32, p = 0.045) and lower odds of 30-days readmission (odds ratio [OR] 0.44, p = 0.042), seroma (OR 0.42, p = 0.036), and hematoma (OR 0.24, p = 0.011) compared with delayed reconstruction. In the PMRT group, skin-preserving reconstruction was independently associated with shorter hospital stay (ß - 1.15, p < 0.001) and operative time (ß - 97.0, p < 0.001) and lower odds of 30-days readmission (OR 0.29, p = 0.005) and infection (OR 0.33, p = 0.023) compared with delayed reconstruction. Skin-preserving reconstruction had a 10.6% tissue expander loss rate and did not differ from delayed reconstruction in terms of patient-reported satisfaction with breast, psychosocial well-being, or sexual well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Skin-preserving, staged, microvascular, breast reconstruction is safe regardless of the need for PMRT, with an acceptable tissue expander loss rate, and is associated with improved flap outcomes and similar patient-reported quality of life to that of delayed reconstruction.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Quality of Life , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant/adverse effects , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although obesity has previously been associated with poor outcomes after mastectomy and breast reconstruction, its impact across the WHO obesity classification spectrum and the differential effects of various optimization strategies on patient outcomes have yet to be delineated. We sought to examine the impact of WHO obesity classification on intraoperative surgical and medical complications, postoperative surgical and patient-reported outcomes of mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction, and delineate outcomes optimization strategies for obese patients. STUDY DESIGN: This is a review of consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction from 2016 to 2022. Primary outcomes were complication rates. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes and optimal management strategies. RESULTS: We identified 1,640 mastectomies and reconstructions in 1,240 patients with mean follow-up of 24.2 ± 19.2 months. Patients with class II/III obesity had higher adjusted risk of wound dehiscence (odds ratio [OR] 3.20; p < 0.001), skin flap necrosis (OR 2.60; p < 0.001), deep venous thrombosis (OR 3.90; p < 0.033), and pulmonary embolism (OR 15.3; p = 0.001) than nonobese patients. Obese patients demonstrated significantly lower satisfaction with breasts (67.3 ± 27.7 vs 73.7 ± 24.0; p = 0.043) and psychological well-being (72.4 ± 27.0 vs 82.0 ± 20.8; p = 0.001) than nonobese patients. Unilateral delayed reconstructions were associated with independently shorter hospital stay (ß -0.65; p = 0.002) and lower adjusted risk of 30-day readmission (OR 0.45; p = 0.031), skin flap necrosis (OR 0.14; p = 0.031), and pulmonary embolism (OR 0.07; p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Obese women should be closely monitored for adverse events and lower quality of life, offered measures to optimize thromboembolic prophylaxis, and advised on the risks and benefits of unilateral delayed reconstruction.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Pulmonary Embolism , Humans , Female , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Beauty , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Obesity/complications , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Necrosis/complications , Retrospective StudiesSubject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Mammaplasty/methods , Skin , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Breast Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
SUMMARY: Thigh-based flaps are increasingly popular options for autologous breast reconstruction in the setting of abdominal donor-site inadequacy, previous surgery, or patient preference, but the volume and skin associated with these flaps are often lacking relative to the abdomen. An individualized, shared decision-making approach to donor-site selection was adopted based on body shape, surgical history, lifestyle, reconstructive needs, and patient expectations. Different thigh-based flaps combined in stacked, bipedicled, or conjoined configurations were selected to maximize efficient use of available soft-tissue skin and volume while optimizing donor-site aesthetics. A total of 23 thigh-based stacked, bipedicled, or conjoined profunda artery perforator (PAP), lateral thigh perforator (LTP), or gracilis musculocutaneous flap components were used in six patients. Configurations included bilateral stacked PAP and LTP flaps, bipedicled posterolateral thigh flaps based on the LTP and PAP (L-PAP), and bipedicled thigh flaps based on the gracilis and PAP pedicles. Most anastomoses were performed to the antegrade and retrograde internal mammary vessels; intraflap anastomoses were performed in one case. There were no partial or total flap losses. There was one donor-site seroma. Design of stacked, bipedicled, and conjoined thigh-based flaps using multiple conventional flap components allows for tailored approaches to donor-site utilization based on individual body shape in selected patients. Bipedicled design with the L-PAP flap represents one strategy in appropriate cases to overcome skin and volume deficiencies while facilitating coning and projection. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
Subject(s)
Gracilis Muscle , Mammaplasty , Perforator Flap , Humans , Thigh/surgery , Perforator Flap/blood supply , Breast/surgery , Gracilis Muscle/transplantation , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Although autologous free-flap breast reconstruction is the most durable means of reconstruction, it is unclear how many additional operations are needed to optimize the aesthetic outcome of the reconstructed breast. The present study aimed to determine the average number of elective breast revision procedures performed for aesthetic reasons in patients undergoing unilateral autologous breast reconstruction and to analyze variables associated with undergoing additional procedures. Methods: A retrospective review of all unilateral abdominal-based free-flap breast reconstructions performed from 2000 to 2014 was undertaken at a tertiary academic center. Results: Overall, 1251 patients were included in the analysis. The average number of breast revision procedures was 1.1 ± 0.9, and 903 patients (72.2%) underwent at least one revision procedure. Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that younger age, higher body mass index, and prior oncologic surgery on the reconstructed breast were factors associated with increased likelihood of undergoing a revision procedure. The probability of undergoing at least one revision increased by 4% with every 1-unit (kg/m2) increase in a patient's body mass index. Multiple Poisson regression modeling demonstrated that younger age, prior oncologic surgery on the reconstructed breast, and bipedicle flap reconstruction were significant factors associated with undergoing a greater number of revision procedures. Conclusions: Most patients who undergo unilateral autologous breast reconstruction require at least one additional operation to optimize their breast aesthetic results. Young age and obesity increase the likelihood of undergoing additional operations. These findings can aid reconstructive microsurgeons in counseling patients and establishing patient expectations prior to their undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction.
ABSTRACT
We compared the surgical skills and outcomes of microsurgical fellows who completed an independent versus integrated plastic surgery residency. Methods: We reviewed outcomes of abdominal wall reconstructions performed autonomously by microsurgical fellows at our institution from March 2005 to June 2019; outcome measures included hernia recurrence, surgical site occurrence, surgical site infection, length of hospital stay, unplanned return to the operating room, and 30-day readmission. The microsurgical skills were prospectively evaluated using the validated Structured Assessment of Microsurgical Skills at the start and end of the fellowship, in an animal laboratory model and clinical microsurgical cases. Multivariable hierarchical models were constructed to evaluate study outcomes. Results: We identified 44 fellows and 118 consecutive patients (52% women) who met our inclusion criteria. Independent fellows performed 55% (n = 65) of cases, and 45% were performed by integrated fellows. We found no significant difference in hernia recurrence, surgical site occurrences, surgical site infections, 30-day readmission, unplanned return to the operating room, or length of stay between the two groups in adjusted models. Although laboratory scores were similar between the groups, integrated fellows demonstrated higher initial clinical scores (42.0 ± 4.9 versus 37.7 ± 5.0, P = 0.04); however, the final clinical scores were similar (50.8 ± 6.0 versus 48.9 ± 5.2, P = 0.45). Conclusions: Independent and integrated fellows demonstrated similar long-term patient outcomes. Although integrated fellows had better initial microsurgical skills, evaluation at the conclusion of fellowship revealed similar performance, indicating that fellowship training allows for further development of competent surgeons.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in prosthesis design and surgical techniques, periprosthetic infection and explantation rates following implant-based reconstruction (IBR) remain relatively high. Artificial intelligence is an extremely powerful predictive tool that involves machine learning (ML) algorithms. We sought to develop, validate, and evaluate the use of ML algorithms to predict complications of IBR. METHODS: A comprehensive review of patients who underwent IBR from January of 2018 to December of 2019 was conducted. Nine supervised ML algorithms were developed to predict periprosthetic infection and explantation. Patient data were randomly divided into training (80%) and testing (20%) sets. RESULTS: The authors identified 481 patients (694 reconstructions) with a mean ± SD age of 50.0 ± 11.5 years, mean ± SD body mass index of 26.7 ± 4.8 kg/m 2 , and median follow-up time of 16.1 months (range, 11.9 to 3.2 months). Periprosthetic infection developed in 113 of the reconstructions (16.3%), and explantation was required with 82 (11.8%) of them. ML demonstrated good discriminatory performance in predicting periprosthetic infection and explantation (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.73 and 0.78, respectively), and identified nine and 12 significant predictors of periprosthetic infection and explantation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ML algorithms trained using readily available perioperative clinical data accurately predict periprosthetic infection and explantation following IBR. The authors' findings support incorporating ML models into perioperative assessment of patients undergoing IBR to provide data-driven, patient-specific risk assessment to aid individualized patient counseling, shared decision-making, and presurgical optimization.