Domestic and International Cosmetic Tourism Complications Presenting to a U.S. Tertiary Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Cosmetic surgery tourism has become a significant global industry. Oftentimes, patients who develop postoperative complications present for care in their home U.S. state. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated patients who either traveled abroad or to other states within the United States for cosmetic surgeries and returned with complications treated in the authors' center. We sought to compare rates of complications between patients that underwent cosmetic surgery internationally and domestically. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study reviewed patients who presented from June 2014 to June 2022 with concerns related to cosmetic surgeries performed in another state or abroad. Binary logistic regressions were performed to assess differences in outcomes between domestic and international cases, including complications, interventions, and admissions. RESULTS: One-hundred twenty-three patients (97.6% female, me an age 34.0 ± 8.7 years, range 16-62 years) comprised 159 emergency department consultations. The most common procedures included abdominoplasty (n=72) and liposuction (n=56). Complications included wound dehiscence (n=39), infection (n=38), and seroma (n=34). Over one-half of patients required intervention. Twenty-nine patients (23.6%) required hospital admission. On multivariate regression analyses, incidence of seroma (p=0.025) and oral (p=0.036) and intravenous antibiotic prescriptions (p=0.045) were significantly greater among the international cohort compared to domestic, whereas all other complication variables were non-significant. There were no other significant differences in operative interventions or hospital admissions between international and domestic cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to domestic tourism cases, international tourism cases were associated with significantly higher rates of seroma formation and antibiotic use. There were no significant differences otherwise in overall complications including infections, operative interventions, or hospital admissions.

Management of Acute Wounds-Expert Panel Consensus Statement.

Significance: The Wound Healing Foundation recognized the need for consensus-based unbiased recommendations for the treatment of wounds. As a first step, a consensus on the treatment of chronic wounds was developed and published in 2022. The current publication on acute wounds represents the second step in this process. Acute wounds may result from any number of conditions, including burns, military and combat operations, and trauma to specific areas of the body. The management of acute wounds requires timely and evidence-driven intervention to achieve optimal clinical outcomes. This consensus statement provides the clinician with the necessary foundational approaches to the causes, diagnosis, and therapeutic management of acute wounds. Presented in a structured format, this is a useful guide for clinicians and learners in all patient care settings. Recent Advances: Recent advances in the management of acute wounds have centered on stabilization and treatment in the military and combat environment. Specifically, advancements in hemostasis, resuscitation, and the mitigation of infection risk through timely initiation of antibiotics and avoidance of high-pressure irrigation in contaminated soft tissue injury. Critical Issues: Critical issues include infection control, pain management, and the unique considerations for the management of acute wounds in pediatric patients. Future Directions: Future directions include new approaches to preventing the progression and conversion of burns through the use of specific gel formulations. Additionally, the use of three-dimensional bioprinting and photo-modulation for reconstruction is a promising area for continued discovery.

Systematic Review of Prophylactic Plastic Surgery Closure to Prevent Postoperative Wound Complications Following Spine Surgery.

Spinal surgeries are increasingly performed in the United States, but complication rates can be unacceptably high at up to 26%. Consequently, plastic surgeons (PS) are sometimes recruited by spine surgeons (SS) for intraoperative assistance with soft tissue closures. An electronic multidatabase literature search was systematically conducted to determine whether spinal wound closure performed by PS minimizes postoperative wound healing complications when compared to closure by SS (neurosurgical or orthopedic), with the hypothesis that closures by PS minimizes incidence of complications. All published studies involving patients who underwent posterior spinal surgery with closure by PS or SS at index spine surgery were identified. Filtering by exclusion criteria identified 10 studies, 4 of which were comparative in nature and included both closures by PS and SS. Of these 4, none reported significant differences in postoperative outcomes between the groups. Across all studies, PS were involved in cases with higher baseline risk for wound complications and greater comorbidity burden. Closures by PS were significantly more likely to have had prior chemotherapy in 2 of the 4 (50%) studies (P = 0.014, P < 0.001) and radiation in 3 of the 4 (75%) studies (P < 0.001, P < 0.01, P < 0.001). In conclusion, closures by PS are frequently performed in higher risk cases, and use of PS in these closures may normalize the risk of wound complications to that of the normal risk cohort, though the overall level of evidence of the published literature is low.