Impact of Injury Mechanisms on Patterns and Management of Facial Fractures.

Mechanisms causing facial fractures have evolved over time and may be predictive of the types of injuries sustained. The objective of this study is to examine the impact of mechanisms of injury on the type and management of facial fractures at our Level 1 Trauma Center. The authors performed an Institutional Review Board-approved review of our network's trauma registry from 2006 to 2010, documenting age, sex, mechanism, Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale, facial fracture patterns (nasal, maxillary/malar, orbital, mandible), and reconstructions. Mechanism rates were compared using a Pearson χ2 test. The database identified 23,318 patients, including 1686 patients with facial fractures and a subset of 1505 patients sustaining 2094 fractures by motor vehicle collision (MVC), fall, or assault. Nasal fractures were the most common injuries sustained by all mechanisms. MVCs were most likely to cause nasal and malar/maxillary fractures (P < 0.01). Falls were the least likely and assaults the most likely to cause mandible fractures (P < 0.001), the most common injury leading to surgical intervention (P < 0.001). Although not statistically significant, fractures sustained in MVCs were the most likely overall to undergo surgical intervention. Age, number of fractures, and alcohol level were statistically significant variables associated with operative management. Age and number of fractures sustained were associated with operative intervention. Although there is a statistically significant correlation between mechanism of injury and type of facial fracture sustained, none of the mechanisms evaluated herein are statistically associated with surgical intervention. Clinical Question/Level of Evidence: Therapeutic, III.

Tissue Expander Complications Predict Permanent Implant Complications and Failure of Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Two-stage tissue expander-based breast reconstruction is the most commonly used reconstructive modality following mastectomy. We sought to determine if patients who experienced complications during the expansion phase were at increased risk for complications or reconstructive failure after the exchange procedure. METHODS: A retrospective review of tissue expander-based breast reconstructions was performed from January 2007 through December 2011. Variables evaluated included age, presence of cancer, tobacco use, body mass index, comorbidities, use of acellular dermal matrix, chemotherapy, radiation, timing of reconstruction (delayed/immediate), intraoperative tissue expander fill, complications, and explantation or salvage of the reconstruction by means of debridement and closure or myocutaneous flap. RESULTS: A total of 196 patients underwent mastectomy with 304 tissue expander reconstructions. Tobacco use (active and remote), hypertension, and radiation were associated with complications. Patients with a salvaged tissue expander complication were 3 times more likely to have a complication after placement of a permanent implant and 9 times more likely to fail permanent implant reconstruction (ie, require explantation). CONCLUSIONS: Women with complications after placement of a tissue expander are at significantly increased risk for both complications and reconstructive failure after placement of a permanent implant. Consideration for earlier autologous reconstruction as a salvage should be strongly considered in patients with a tissue expander complication, particularly in smokers and those undergoing radiation therapy.