Anatomic Subtype Differences in Extramammary Paget Disease: A Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Extramammary Paget disease (EMPD) is a rare, highly recurrent cutaneous malignant neoplasm of unclear origin. EMPD arises most commonly on the vulvar and penoscrotal skin. It is not presently known how anatomic subtype of EMPD affects disease presentation and management. Objective: To compare demographic and tumor characteristics and treatment approaches for different EMPD subtypes. Recommendations for diagnosis and treatment are presented. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Reviews CENTRAL from December 1, 1990, to October 24, 2022. Study Selection: Articles were excluded if they were not in English, reported fewer than 3 patients, did not specify information by anatomic subtype, or contained no case-level data. Metastatic cases on presentation were also excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Abstracts of 1295 eligible articles were independently reviewed by 5 coauthors, and 135 articles retained. Reporting was in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. The analysis was cunducted in August 2019 and updated in November 2022. Findings: Most vulvar EMPD cases were asymptomatic, and diagnosis was relatively delayed (mean, 25.1 months). Although most vulvar EMPD cases were intraepidermal (1247/1773 [70.3%]), radical surgeries were still performed in almost one-third of cases. Despite this aggressive surgical approach, 481 of 1423 (34%) recurred, commonly confined to the skin and mucosa (177/198 [89.4%]). By contrast, 152 of 1101 penoscrotal EMPD cases (14%) recurred, but more than one-third of these recurrences were regional or associated with distant metastases (54 of 152 [35.5%]). Perianal EMPD cases recurred in one-third of cases (74/218 [33.9%]), with one-third of these recurrences being regional or associated with distant metastasis (20 of 74 [27.0%]). Perianal EMPD also had the highest rate of invasive disease (50% of cases). Conclusions and Relevance: The diagnosis and treatment of EMPD should differ based on anatomic subtypes. Considerations for updated practice may include less morbid treatments for vulvar EMPD, which is primarily epidermal, and close surveillance for local recurrence in vulvar EMPD and metastatic recurrence in perianal EMPD. Recurrences in penoscrotal subtype were less common, and selective surveillance in this subtype may be considered. Limitations of this study include the lack of replication cohorts and the exclusion of studies that did not stratify outcomes by anatomic subtype.

Patient-reported Outcomes of Scar Impact: Comparing of Abdominoplasty, Breast Surgery, and Facial Surgery Patients.

Scarring negatively impacts patient mental health, causing worsened self-confidence, body image, and social interactions, as well as anxiety and depression. The objective of this study is to evaluate the scarring impact after facial surgery, breast surgery, and full abdominoplasty for symptoms, appearance, psychosocial health, career, and sexual well-being using validated patient-reported outcome measures. Method: A total of 901 patients from five providers completed the SCAR-Q (covering symptoms, appearance, and psychosocial) and Career/Sexual Well-being assessments via phone or email where a higher score indicated a more positive scar perception. Results: Of the 901 patients, 38.1% had abdominoplasty surgery, 38.1% breast reduction, 15.3% facial surgery, 4.7% breast lift, and 3.9% breast augmentation. The differences in SCAR-Q, appearance, and symptom scores between the five procedures were statistically significant. Breast augmentation SCAR-Q scores (median = 256) and facial surgery (median = 242) were significantly higher than those of abdominoplasty patients (median = 219; P = 0.003 and P = 0.001, respectively). Duration after surgery was positively correlated with improved symptom scale scores for abdominoplasty (r = 0.24, P < 0.001), breast augmentation (r = 0.71, P = 0.015), and facial surgery patients (r = 0.28, P = 0.001), but not for other procedures. Conclusions: This study is the first to show that breast augmentation and facial surgery patients have a more positive perception of their scars in terms of appearance, symptoms, psychosocial, career, and sexual well-being impact than abdominoplasty patients. Furthermore, the data suggest that symptoms may improve over time for abdominoplasty, breast augmentation, and facial surgery patients. This study highlights the need for further follow-up, counseling, or other improvements to postoperative scar care.

The Palpable Nodule after Autologous Fat Grafting: Distinguishing Benign versus Malignant Lesions in Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Nodule formation after autologous fat grafting to the breast is the most common complication. In the reconstructive population, this generates significant patient anxiety and presents a diagnostic challenge. The authors characterized palpable nodule occurrence after autologous fat grafting in breast reconstruction and compared benign versus malignant nodule characteristics. METHODS: Chart review of the senior author's experience with breast fat grafting was performed. Data extracted included demographics, intraoperative details, nodule data, radiographic characteristics, and biopsy results. Logistic regression identified risk factors for nodule formation. Unpaired t tests and Fisher exact tests compared characteristics of benign versus malignant nodules. RESULTS: In total, 775 breasts were identified that underwent 1158 fat grafting procedures, of which 67 (8.6 percent) developed palpable nodules. Sonographic characterization of nodules included presumed fat necrosis (38.2 percent), benign lesions (27.6 percent), presumed oil cysts (17.1 percent), indeterminate (8.9 percent), and concerning for malignancy (8.1 percent). Lesions concerning for malignancy were more often irregular (10.0 percent versus 0 to 2.9 percent of benign nodules) and more often larger than 0.8 cm in greatest dimension (80 percent versus 42.9 to 61.8 percent of benign nodules). Six patients developed a palpable local recurrence. Malignant nodules tended to be larger (1.45 cm versus 0.70 cm; p = 0.03), were more often vascular (50 percent versus 3.8 percent; p = 0.03), and tended to occur later (17.5 months versus 10.0 months; p = 0.60). Benign nodules occurred in the setting of larger fat graft volumes (64.2 cc versus 40.0 cc; p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: This study provides the first comparison of radiographic and clinical characteristics between benign and malignant palpable nodules after autologous fat grafting in breast reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OE EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Development of a core outcome set for basal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There is variation in the outcomes reported in clinical studies of basal cell carcinoma. This can prevent effective meta-analyses from answering important clinical questions. OBJECTIVE: To identify a recommended minimum set of core outcomes for basal cell carcinoma clinical trials. METHODS: Patient and professional Delphi process to cull a long list, culminating in a consensus meeting. To be provisionally accepted, outcomes needed to be deemed important (score, 7-9, with 9 being the maximum) by 70% of each stakeholder group. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-five candidate outcomes identified via a systematic literature review and survey of key stakeholders were reduced to 74 that were rated by 100 health care professionals and patients in 2 Delphi rounds. Twenty-seven outcomes were provisionally accepted. The final core set of 5 agreed-upon outcomes after the consensus meeting included complete response; persistent or serious adverse events; recurrence-free survival; quality of life; and patient satisfaction, including cosmetic outcome. LIMITATIONS: English-speaking patients and professionals rated outcomes extracted from English language studies. CONCLUSION: A core outcome set for basal cell carcinoma has been developed. The use of relevant measures may improve the utility of clinical research and the quality of therapeutic guidance available to clinicians.

Scar Perception: A Comparison of African American and White Self-identified Patients.

Scars can have significant morbidity and negatively impact psychological, functional, and cosmetic outcomes as well as the overall quality-of-life, especially among ethnic minorities. The objective of this study was to evaluate African American and White patients' perception of their scars' impact on symptoms, appearance, psychosocial health, career, and sexual well-being, using validated assessment tools. Method: A total of 675 abdominoplasty and breast surgery patients from four providers completed the SCAR-Q, and Career/Sexual Well-Being scales via phone or email. A higher score on both assessments indicates a more positive patient perception. Results: Of the 675 respondents, 77.0% were White, and 23.0% were African American. White patients scored significantly higher on the SCAR-Q (232 ± 79 versus 203 ± 116), appearance (66 ± 26 versus 55 ± 29), and Career/Sexual Well-Being (16 ± 2 versus 15 ± 5) scales than African American patients (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively). There was no significant correlation between duration after surgery and symptoms or appearance scores for African American patients (P = 0.11, P = 0.37). There was no significant correlation between patient age and SCAR-Q score or time after surgery and psychosocial scores. Conclusions: African American patients are more likely to have lower perceptions of their scarring appearance, symptoms, psychosocial impact, career impact, and sexual well-being impact than White patients. Scar appearance and symptoms are less likely to improve over time for African American patients. This study highlights the need to address patient ethnicity when considering further follow-up, counseling, or other measures to enhance scar perception.

Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Extramammary Paget Disease.

IMPORTANCE: Extramammary Paget disease (EMPD) is a frequently recurring malignant neoplasm with metastatic potential that presents in older adults on the genital, perianal, and axillary skin. Extramammary Paget disease can precede or occur along with internal malignant neoplasms. OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for the care of adults with EMPD. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A systematic review of the literature on EMPD from January 1990 to September 18, 2019, was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Libraries. Analysis included 483 studies. A multidisciplinary expert panel evaluation of the findings led to the development of clinical care recommendations for EMPD. FINDINGS: The key findings were as follows: (1) Multiple skin biopsies, including those of any nodular areas, are critical for diagnosis. (2) Malignant neoplasm screening appropriate for age and anatomical site should be performed at baseline to distinguish between primary and secondary EMPD. (3) Routine use of sentinel lymph node biopsy or lymph node dissection is not recommended. (4) For intraepidermal EMPD, surgical and nonsurgical treatments may be used depending on patient and tumor characteristics, although cure rates may be superior with surgical approaches. For invasive EMPD, surgical resection with curative intent is preferred. (5) Patients with unresectable intraepidermal EMPD or patients who are medically unable to undergo surgery may receive nonsurgical treatments, including radiotherapy, imiquimod, photodynamic therapy, carbon dioxide laser therapy, or other modalities. (6) Distant metastatic disease may be treated with chemotherapy or individualized targeted approaches. (7) Close follow-up to monitor for recurrence is recommended for at least the first 5 years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Clinical practice guidelines for EMPD provide guidance regarding recommended diagnostic approaches, differentiation between invasive and noninvasive disease, and use of surgical vs nonsurgical treatments. Prospective registries may further improve our understanding of the natural history of the disease in primary vs secondary EMPD, clarify features of high-risk tumors, and identify superior management approaches.

Treatment of Surgical Scars With Combination Pulsed Dye and Fractional Nonablative Laser: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of combined pulsed-dye laser (PDL) and NAFL for treatment of surgical scars. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: PDL and NAFL have not been compared to healing by time alone. METHODS: Randomized controlled, single-blinded clinical trial at an urban, university hospital. Healthy adults' status post skin surgery with primary closure were randomized to either 3 sessions of combination PDL and NAFL every 2 to 8 weeks, or control of no treatment. At baseline and 36-week follow-up, Patient and observer Scar Assessment Scale and Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating were completed by participants and blinded physicians. The primary outcome was scar improvement, as measured by the score difference over time. RESULTS: Of 76 participants, 52 completed the study (July 2017 to June 2019). No severe adverse events were reported. Patient and observer Scar Assessment Scale assessments demonstrated improvement in total score in the laser group compared to controls, as reported by patients [mean difference (standard deviation), laser: 12.86 (6.91) vs control: 7.25 (6.34); P = 0.004] and blinded physicians [18.32 (8.69) vs 13.08 (9.63); P = 0.044]. Patients observed a greater improvement in scar thickness [3.68 (2.04) vs 1.88 (1.85); P = 0.002] and stiffness [3.57 (2.78) vs 1.50 (2.11); P = 0.004] with lasers, and physicians reported greater improvement in vascularity [3.71 (1.98) vs 1.71 (1.52); P = 0.0002]. The live Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating subscore for erythema improved significantly with lasers [1.04 (0.79) vs 0.42 (0.50); P = 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Combined PDL and NAFL resulted in scar improvement. Scar thickness, stiffness, and erythema were improved. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03057964).

Can Breast Implants Induce Breast Cancer Immunosurveillance? An Analysis of Antibody Response to Breast Cancer Antigen following Implant Placement.

BACKGROUND: Women with cosmetic breast implants have significantly lower rates of subsequent breast cancer than the general population (relative risk, 0.63; 95 percent CI, 0.56 to 0.71). The authors hypothesize that breast implant-induced local inflammation stimulates immunosurveillance recognition of breast tumor antigen. METHODS: Sera were collected from two cohorts of healthy women: women with long-term breast implants (i.e., breast implants for >6 months) and breast implant-naive women. Antibody responses to breast tumor antigens were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and compared between cohorts by unpaired t test. Of the implant-naive cohort, nine women underwent breast augmentation, and antibody responses before and after implant placement were compared by paired t test. RESULTS: Sera were collected from 104 women: 36 (34.6 percent) long-term breast implants and 68 (65.4 percent) implant-naive women. Women with long-term breast implants had higher antibody responses than implant-naive women to mammaglobin-A (optical density at 450 nm, 0.33 versus 0.22; p = 0.003) and mucin-1 (optical density at 450 nm, 0.42 versus 0.34; p = 0.02). There was no difference in antibody responses to breast cancer susceptibility gene 2, carcinoembryonic antigen, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2, or tetanus. Nine women with longitudinal samples preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively demonstrated significantly elevated antibody responses following implant placement to mammaglobin-A (mean difference, 0.13; p = 0.0002) and mucin-1 (mean difference 0.08; p = 0.02). There was no difference in postimplant responses to other breast tumor antigens, or tetanus. CONCLUSIONS: Women with long-term breast implants have higher antibody recognition of mammaglobin-A and mucin-1. This study provides the first evidence of implant-related immune responses to breast cancer antigens. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, V.

Judging an Expander by Its Cover: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Impact of Tissue Expander Surface Texture on First-Stage Breast Reconstruction Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There is increased scrutiny of texturing on implants and a paucity of data looking at texturing on expanders. Because of the difficulty in controlling potential confounders with these comparative studies, the authors performed propensity matching between smooth and textured tissue expander cohorts to provide definitive insight into the impact of expander texture on breast reconstruction outcomes. METHODS: A single-surgeon experience with immediate two-stage breast reconstruction was reviewed for 90-day postoperative complications after mastectomy and expander placement. Variables extracted included demographics, comorbidities, tissue expander texturing, mastectomy type, infection, seroma, skin flap necrosis, dehiscence, explantation, and overall complication rates. Subjects were 1:1 propensity matched using the nearest neighbor matching algorithm with caliper (maximum propensity score difference) of 0.2, and chi-square test was performed for statistical analysis. RESULTS: After 1:1 propensity matching, 282 reconstructed breasts were analyzed (141 textured versus 141 smooth expanders). Textured expanders had higher minor infection rates than smooth expanders (5.0 percent versus 0 percent; p = 0.024). Smooth expanders had higher seroma rates than textured expanders (5.0 percent versus 0.7 percent; p = 0.031). Smooth expanders also had longer drain retention (20.4 days versus 16.8 days; p = 0.001). There was no difference in other complications, including major infection, explantation, or any complication, between textured and smooth expanders. CONCLUSIONS: Textured expanders are associated with increased minor infection risk, whereas smooth expanders are associated with increased seroma formation. However, these differing complication profiles coalesce to equal explantation rates. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Multidisciplinary surgical treatment approach for dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans: an update.

Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) is a cutaneous sarcoma that has remained a challenge for oncologic and reconstructive surgeons due to a high rate of local recurrence. The objective of this study is to investigate the oncologic and reconstructive benefits of employing a multidisciplinary two-step approach to the treatment of DFSP. A retrospective review was conducted using a prospectively collected database of all patients who underwent resection and reconstruction of large DFSPs by a multidisciplinary team, including a Mohs micrographic surgeon, surgical oncologist, dermatopathologist, and plastic and reconstructive surgeon, at one academic institution from 1998-2018. Each patient underwent Mohs micrographic surgery for peripheral margin clearance (Step 1) followed by wide local excision (WLE) of the deep margin by surgical oncology and immediate reconstruction by plastic surgery (Step 2). 57 patients met inclusion criteria. Average defect size after WLE (Step 2): 87.3 cm2 (range 8.5-1073.5 cm2). Mean follow-up time was 37 months (range 0-138 months). There were no cases of recurrence. A two-step multidisciplinary surgical treatment approach for DFSP minimizes risk of recurrence, decreases patient discomfort, and allows immediate reconstruction after deep margin clearance.

Lateral and Inferior Implant Malposition in Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction: Incidence and Risk Factors.

Implant malposition is one of the most common causes for revision after prosthetic breast reconstruction. There is a paucity of research on the incidence, etiology and risk factors for implant malposition in this setting. METHODS: Retrospective review of a single surgeon's prosthetic breast reconstructions was performed. Variables collected included age, BMI, radiation, chemotherapy, implant characteristics and malposition location (inferior or lateral). Binary logistic regression identified risk factors for malposition. Chi-square test assessed malposition rate as a function of implant volume to BMI subgroups. RESULTS: Of 836 breasts, 82 (9.8%) exhibited implant malposition. Risk factors for any malposition were older age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.07), BMI<25 (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.00-2.70) and bilateral reconstruction (OR 13.41, 95% CI 8.50-21.16). Risk factors for inferior malposition were older age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.06), BMI<25 (OR 3.43, 95% CI 1.88-6.26) and bilateral reconstructions (OR 11.50, 95% CI 6.79-19.49), while risk factors for lateral malposition were only older age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08) and bilateral reconstructions (OR 7.08, 95% CI 4.09-12.26). Post-mastectomy radiation was protective against lateral malposition (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10-0.88). Stratification by implant volume and BMI demonstrated patient subgroups with distinct patterns of malposition (incidence 0.0% versus 10.9%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to identify risk factors for implant malposition after prosthetic breast reconstruction. Different risk factors contributed to malposition in different directions. The effect of implant size on malposition was mediated through BMI, highlighting the interplay of implant and patient characteristics with respect to malposition.

Core Outcome Set for Actinic Keratosis Clinical Trials.

Importance: Although various treatments have been found in clinical trials to be effective in treating actinic keratosis (AK), researchers often report different outcomes. Heterogeneous outcome reporting precludes the comparison of results across studies and impedes the synthesis of treatment effectiveness in systematic reviews. Objective: To establish an international core outcome set for all clinical studies on AK treatment using systematic literature review and a Delphi consensus process. Evidence Review: Survey study with a formal consensus process. The keywords actinic keratosis and treatment were searched in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library to identify English-language studies investigating AK treatments published between January 1, 1980, and July 13, 2015. Physician and patient stakeholders were nominated to participate in Delphi surveys by the Measurement of Priority Outcome Variables in Dermatologic Surgery Steering Committee members. All participants from the first round were invited to participate in the second round. Outcomes reported in randomized controlled clinical trials on AK treatment were rated via web-based e-Delphi consensus surveys. Stakeholders were asked to assess the relative importance of each outcome in 2 Delphi survey rounds. Outcomes were provisionally included, pending the final consensus conference, if at least 70% of patient or physician stakeholders rated the outcome as critically important in 1 or both Delphi rounds and the outcome received a mean score of 7.5 from either stakeholder group. Data analysis was performed from November 5, 2018, to February 27, 2019. Findings: A total of 516 outcomes were identified by reviewing the literature and surveying key stakeholder groups. After deduplication and combination of similar outcomes, 137 of the 516 outcomes were included in the Delphi surveys. Twenty-one physicians and 12 patients participated in round 1 of the eDelphi survey, with 17 physicians (81%) retained and 12 patients (100%) retained in round 2. Of the 137 candidate outcomes, 9 met a priori Delphi consensus criteria, and 6 were included in the final outcomes set after a consensus meeting: complete clearance of AKs, percentage of AKs cleared, severity of adverse events, patient perspective on effectiveness, patient-reported future treatment preference, and recurrence rate. It was recommended that treatment response be assessed at 2 to 4 months and recurrence at 6 to 12 months, with the AK rate of progression to cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma reported whenever long-term follow-up was possible. Conclusions and Relevance: Consensus was reached regarding a core outcome set for AK trials. Further research may help determine the specific outcome measures used to assess each of these outcomes.

Gluteal Vein Anatomy: Location, Caliber, Impact of Patient Positioning, and Implications for Fat Grafting.

BACKGROUND: Deaths in gluteal autografting occur due to gluteal vein injuries, but data are lacking on the precise location and caliber of these veins. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to present the first in vivo study of gluteal vein anatomy utilizing magnetic resonance imaging. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging venography of 16 volunteer hemi-sections was conducted in the supine, prone, prone with a bump (jack-knife), and left and right decubitus positions in 1 session after a single contrast administration. Caliber and course of the superior and inferior gluteal veins (SGV/IGV) were analyzed vs bony landmarks and position changes. RESULTS: The SGV has a very short submuscular course before splitting into 2 smaller branches superolaterally. The IGV runs immediately deep to the gluteus maximus in the center of the buttock as a single large trunk, on average 56 mm deep (mean 27 mm of muscle belly and 30 mm subcutaneous fat). No intramuscular or subcutaneous branches greater than 2 mm were found. In the prone position, the IGV and SGV have an average caliber of 5.96 mm and 5.63 mm. Vessel caliber decreased by 21% and 27%, respectively, in the jack-knife position and by 14% and 15% in lateral decubitus. CONCLUSIONS: The SGV and IGV are immediately deep to gluteus maximus approximately 6 cm deep with a caliber on the order of 6 mm in the prone position. The distribution of these vessels suggests there is no "safe zone" in the intramuscular or submuscular planes. The jackknife or lateral decubitus positions can decrease vein caliber by up to 27%, possibly reducing the risk of injury due to either traction or direct cannula impact.

The Relationship between Animation Deformity and Patient-Reported Outcomes: Application of the BREAST-Q to a Quantitative Stratification of Animation Severity.

BACKGROUND: Animation deformity can occur following subpectoral breast reconstruction and is an oft-touted rationale for prepectoral reconstruction. Despite increasing recognition, there is a paucity of patient-reported outcome studies in women with animation deformity. METHODS: Women presenting after subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction were evaluated for animation deformity. Video analysis and quantitative deformity assessment were performed in conjunction with BREAST-Q surveys. BREAST-Q data were compared to our quantitative animation grading scale to assess the relationship between animation severity and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one subpectoral breast reconstructions met inclusion criteria. Average scores were 67.8 ± 17.9 of 100 for satisfaction with breasts and 78.3 ± 14.1 of 100 for physical well-being. Animation deformity severity did not correlate with satisfaction with breasts (p = 0.44). Physical well-being, particularly pain-related questions, increased with increasing animation (p = 0.01); specifically, patients reported significantly less pulling, nagging, and aching in the breast (p = 0.01, p = 0.001, and p = 0.004, respectively). Patients with the least and most severe animation deformity had significantly higher numbers of revision procedures (0.89 and 1.03 procedures, respectively) compared with patients with intermediate deformity (0.49 procedures; p = 0.01 and p = 0.009, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although pectoralis release creates a more mobile-and more animating-reconstruction, this same release may lead to less pain because muscle is no longer contracting against a fixed space. This may lead to two distinct origins of subpectoral revision: (1) patients in pain (but low animation) and (2) patients with visibly distorted animation (but low pain). CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.

A Quantitative Analysis of Animation Deformity in Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Animation deformity is characterized by implant deformity with pectoralis contraction after subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction. Extant methods to measure and analyze animation deformity are hampered by the paucity of objective, quantitative data. The authors endeavored to supplement subjective measures with an in-depth quantitative analysis. METHODS: Patients undergoing subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction were followed prospectively with video analysis of animation deformity. Nipple displacement and surface area of contour deformity in resting and contracted states were quantified using imaging software. Degree of animation was compared to breast size, body mass index, division of pectoralis muscle, complications, and radiation therapy. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five reconstructed breasts (88 patients) were analyzed. Mean nipple displacement was 2.12 ± 1.04 cm, mean vector of nipple displacement was 62.5 ± 20.6 degrees, and mean area of skin contour irregularity was 16.4 ± 15.41 percent. Intraoperative pectoralis division, smooth/round implants, and bilateral reconstructions were associated with greater deformity. A three-tiered grading system based on thresholds of 2-cm net nipple displacement and 25 percent skin contour irregularity placed 41.4 percent of breasts in grade 1, 35.9 percent in grade 2, and 22.8 percent in grade 3. Interrater variability testing demonstrated 89.5 percent overall agreement (kappa = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the first quantitative analysis of animation deformity in prosthetic breast reconstruction. Geometric analysis of nipple displacement vector and increasing animation with pectoralis division both implicate the inferior pectoralis myotome as a primary driver of animation deformity. A concomitant grading schema was developed to provide a standardized framework for discussing animation from patient to patient and from study to study.