Is Diabetes a Contraindication to Lower Extremity Flap Reconstruction? An Analysis of Threatened Lower Extremities in the NSQIP Database (2010-2020).

Background The impact of diabetes on complication rates following free flap (FF), pedicled flap (PF), and amputation (AMP) procedures on the lower extremity (LE) is examined. Methods Patients who underwent LE PF, FF, and AMP procedures were identified from the 2010 to 2020 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP®) database using Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases-9/10 codes, excluding cases for non-LE pathologies. The cohort was divided into diabetics and nondiabetics. Univariate and adjusted multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. Results Among 38,998 patients undergoing LE procedures, 58% were diabetic. Among diabetics, 95% underwent AMP, 5% underwent PF, and <1% underwent FF. Across all procedure types, noninsulin-dependent (NIDDM) and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) were associated with significantly greater all-cause complication rates compared with absence of diabetes, and IDDM was generally higher risk than NIDDM. Among diabetics, complication rates were not significantly different across procedure types (IDDM: p = 0.5969; NIDDM: p = 0.1902). On adjusted subgroup analysis by diabetic status, flap procedures were not associated with higher odds of complications compared with amputation for IDDM and NIDDM patients. Length of stay > 30 days was statistically associated with IDDM, particularly those undergoing FF (AMP: 5%, PF: 7%, FF: 14%, p = 0.0004). Conclusion Our study highlights the importance of preoperative diabetic optimization prior to LE procedures. For diabetic patients, there were few significant differences in complication rates across procedure type, suggesting that diabetic patients are not at higher risk of complications when attempting limb salvage instead of amputation.

Patient-Reported Outcomes on Subjective Nipple Sensation After Double-Incision and Periareolar Mastectomy for Chest Masculinization: Subjective Nipple Sensation After Chest Masculinization.

ABSTRACT: We evaluated patient-reported outcomes to assess for patient and procedural factors associated with postchest masculinization subjective nipple sensation. Patients who underwent double-incision or periareolar mastectomies for chest masculinization by a single senior surgeon (2015-2019) were surveyed at 2 time points regarding postoperative nipple sensation and satisfaction, including patient-reported outcomes using BODY-Q modules (Q-Portfolio.org). Demographic, operative, and postoperative variables were obtained from medical records. Patients were stratified according to survey responses. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.Response rate was 42% for survey 1 and 22% for survey 2. Of the 151 survey 1 responders, 138 (91.4%) received double-incision mastectomies and 13 (8.6%) received periareolar mastectomies. Among Survey 1 responders, 84.6% periareolar patients and 69.6% double-incision patients reported "completely" or "a little" nipple sensation preservation, and the difference trended toward significance (P = 0.0719). There was a stepwise increase in proportion of patients reporting sensation with greater recovery time until response to survey 1. Obesity (P = 0.0080) and greater tissue removed (P = 0.0247) were significantly associated with decreased nipple sensation. Nipple satisfaction scores were significantly higher for patients reporting improved nipple sensation (P = 0.0235). Responders to survey 2 who reported greater satisfaction with nipple sensation were significantly more likely to report preserved sensitivity to light touch (P = 0.0277), pressure (P = 0.0046), and temperature (P = 0.0031). Preserved erogenous sensation was also significantly associated with greater satisfaction (P = 0.0018).In conclusion, we found that nipple sensation may be associated with postoperative nipple satisfaction. Operative techniques to optimize nipple sensation preservation may improve this population's postoperative satisfaction.

Pedicled Flaps for High-Risk Open Vascular Procedures of the Lower Extremity: An Analysis of The National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Database.

BACKGROUND: Use of pedicled flaps in vascular procedures is associated with decreased infection and wound breakdown. We evaluated the risk profile and postoperative complications associated with lower extremity open vascular procedures with and without pedicled flaps. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2010-2020) was queried for Current Procedural Terminology codes representing lower extremity open vascular procedures, including trunk and lower extremity pedicled flaps. Flap patients were compared with a randomized control group without flaps (1:3 cases to controls). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: We identified 132,934 adults who underwent lower extremity open vascular procedures. Concurrent pedicled flaps were rare (0.7%), and patients undergoing bypass procedures were more likely to receive a flap than nonbypass patients (69 vs. 64%, p < 0.0001). Flap patients had greater comorbidities. On univariate analysis, flap patients were more likely to experience wound (p = 0.0026), mild systemic (p < 0.0001), severe systemic (p = 0.0452), and all-cause complications (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for factors clinically suspected to be associated with increased risk (gender, body mass index, procedure type, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, functional status, diabetes, smoking, and albumin < 3.5 mg/dL), wound (p = 0.096) and severe systemic complications (p = 0.0719) were no longer significantly associated with flap patients. CONCLUSION: Lower extremity vascular procedures are associated with a high risk of complications. Use of pedicled flaps remains uncommon and more often performed in patients with greater comorbid disease. However, after risk adjustment, use of a pedicled flap in high-risk patients may be associated with lower than expected wound and severe systemic complications.

Text-Based Intervention Increases Mammography Uptake at an Urban Safety-Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The low mammography rates at the authors' safety-net hospital (SNH) are associated with higher rates of late-stage disease. Previously, they showed that a phone call-based intervention with reminder and scheduling components significantly increased mammography uptake by 12% in their population, but implementation was resource-heavy. This study analyzed whether a text-based intervention with reminder and scheduling components could increase mammography uptake at 3 months compared with usual care. METHODS: This randomized controlled study analyzed 1277 women ages 50 to 65 years who were overdue for a mammogram but had established care at a primary-care clinic within an urban SNH. The patients received intervention 1 (a text reminder with specific scheduling options), intervention 2 (a text reminder with open-ended scheduling options), or usual care (control). Differences in the percentage of mammography uptake at 3 months were compared between the intervention and control groups using a two-tailed chi-square test. RESULTS: The patients receiving a text-based reminder and scheduling opportunity were significantly more likely to receive mammograms within 3 months than those in the usual-care control group (10.2% vs 6.2%; χ2 = 5.6279; p = 0.03). In the intervention group, 10.3% of the participants scheduled an appointment for a mammogram via text, and 63% of these participants received a mammogram. Finally, mammography compliance did not differ by the type of scheduling offered (specific vs general) or by primary care clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging technology for reminders and scheduling via two-way text messaging is effective in increasing mammography uptake in an urban safety-net setting and may be used as part of a multi-tiered intervention to increase breast cancer screening in a safety-net setting.

Impact of Phone-Call and Access-Enhancing Intervention on Mammography Uptake among Primary Care Patients at an Urban Safety-Net Hospital: A Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Our urban safety-net hospital (SNH) has very low screening mammogram rates within its primary care clinics. Despite Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation, we see ~ 3 × more late-stage breast cancer diagnoses than other CoC sites across the country, and recently showed this to be strongly associated with lack of screening (Ahmadiyeh et al. in J Health Care Poor Underserved, in press, 2020). Here we study whether a two-step intervention (phone calls and assistance scheduling mammograms) increases uptake over usual care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Randomized controlled study of 890 women aged 50-65 years who were due for biennial screening mammograms and who were established within one of five primary care clinics at an urban SNH. Each patient in the intervention group was called with overdue status (up to three times, voicemail left if needed) and offered assistance scheduling mammogram appointment. Mammography uptake at 3 and 6 months was analyzed. RESULTS: Intervention significantly increased uptake compared with usual care at both timepoints (18% versus 6% at 3 months; χ2 = 27.597, p < 0.0001; 23% versus 12% at 6 months; χ2 = 18.0, p < 0.0001), with scheduling component driving effectiveness. Of those who were successfully contacted, uptake was significantly greater among those who scheduled appointments versus those who did not (47% versus 9%, χ2 = 95, p < 0.0001), and uptake was no different between contacted but not scheduled patients and usual care controls. CONCLUSIONS: Phone call with access-enhancing intervention (facilitating mammogram appointments) increased screening mammogram uptake among primary care patients in an urban safety-net setting and may be applicable to other urban SNHs around the country.