Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complication Profiles of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Patients With Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications of distinct implant-based breast reconstruction modality for patients with postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on breast cancer patients with stage II-III disease who performed implant-based breast reconstruction following with PMRT between September 2016 and April 2022. The patients were categorized into two matched groups: (1) patients receiving prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) or (2) subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) followed by PMRT. Following reconstruction, the patients were further compared for PMRT with the tissue expander (PMRT-TE) versus PMRT with permanent implant (PMRT-PI). PROs were measured with BREAST-Q questionnaire. Early and late complications were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 55 eligible patients were recruited. Patients who underwent PBR reported significantly higher satisfaction with breasts scores (P = 0.003) compared with the SBR group. The PMRT-TE group had higher satisfaction with breasts (P = 0.001) but lower physical well-being (P = 0.029) scores compared with PMRT-PI group. Moreover, patients in SBR cohort had a higher risk of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) (20.5% vs 6.3%) and implant dislocation (48.7% vs 12.5%) than patients in PBR cohort. Patients in PMRT-PI group had a slightly higher rate of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) than PMRT-TE group (20.8% vs 12.9%). CONCLUSIONS: PBR was associated with lower rates of late complications, especially for implant dislocation, and higher satisfaction with breasts scores compared to SBR. In addition, compared to PMRT-TE with PMRT-PI, patients in PMRT-TE cohort reported superior PROs of satisfaction with breasts.

Acellular Dermal Matrix-Assisted, Prosthesis-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Comparison of SurgiMend PRS, AlloDerm, and DermACELL.

BACKGROUND: Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are frequently employed in immediate prosthesis-based breast reconstruction (iPBR) to provide structural support. Despite differences in ADM derivatives, few studies directly compare their outcomes in the setting of iPBR. We sought to conduct a large head-to-head study comparing 3 ADMs used across our institution. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review of patients undergoing iPBR with SurgiMend PRS (fetal bovine-derived; Integra Lifesciences, Princeton, NJ), AlloDerm (human-derived; LifeCell Corp, Bridgewater, NJ), or DermACELL (human-derived; Stryker Corp, Kalamazoo, MI) between January 2014 to July 2022 was performed. Primary outcomes included rates of unplanned explantation and total reconstructive failure. Secondary outcomes included 90-day postoperative complications and long-term rates of capsular contracture development. RESULTS: A total of 738 patients (1228 breasts) underwent iPBR during the study period; 405 patients received DermACELL (54.9%), 231 received AlloDerm (31.3%), and 102 received SurgiMend PRS (13.8%). Rates of short-term complications, total reconstruction failure, reoperation within 90 days, capsular contracture, and unplanned explantation were comparable. These findings remained true upon multivariate analysis accounting for baseline differences between cohorts, whereby ADM type was not an independent predictor of any outcome of interest. Conversely, factors such as body mass index, diabetes mellitus, smoking history, neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiation, skin-sparing mastectomy, Wise pattern and periareolar incisions, use of tissue expanders, and a subpectoral plane of insertion were significant predictors of postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Low rates of complications support the equivalency of fetal bovine and human-derived ADMs in iPBR. Patient characteristics and operative approach are likely more predictive of postoperative outcomes than ADM derivative alone.

Periareolar Skin-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Implant-Based Reconstruction: A Reappraisal.

INTRODUCTION: Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) is often used when tumor location prohibits performing a nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). We examined a square excision of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) and an X-shaped purse string closure after implant-based reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients undergoing periareolar SSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction from January 2015 through December 2022, specifically identifying those patients who had square NAC excision and skin closure. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. They underwent 54 periareolar SSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction (bilateral 25, unilateral 4). Indications for surgery were cancer (30) and prophylactic (24; 2 patients had bilateral cancer). Reconstructive methods included tissue expander (TE) (36 [66.7%]) and direct-to-implant (DTI) (18 [33.3%]). The mean mastectomy weights and final implant sizes were similar between the 2 groups. Overall wound complications occurred in 13 (24.1%) of the breasts: mastectomy skin flap necrosis (MSFN; 10 [18.5%]) and infection (3 [5.6%]). Reconstructive failure occurred in 3 cases: TE, 1 (infection); DTI, 2 (MSFN/exposure). MSFN by reconstructive method: TE, 4 (11.1%); DTI, 6 (33.3%) (P = 0.05, comparing MSFN rates between TE and DTI methods). The mean initial TE fill volume was 247.1 cc; mean implant size in the DTI group was 417.8 cc (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The square NAC excision and closure can minimize the surgical incision in implant reconstruction. Two-stage TE reconstruction permits lower initial fill volumes, which reduces the risk of MSFN after box to X closure of SSM and implant-based reconstruction. It is useful in small- to moderate-sized breasts with mild ptosis in patients who are not candidates for NSM.

Does the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADM) in women undergoing pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction increase operative success versus non-use of ADM in the same setting? A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in the UK. Following mastectomy, reconstruction is now integral to the surgical management of breast cancer, of which implant-based reconstruction (IBBR) is the most common type. IBBR initially evolved from pre-pectoral to post-pectoral due to complications, but with developments in oncoplastic techniques and new implant technology, interest in pre-pectoral IBBR has increased. Many surgeons use acellular dermal matrices (ADM); however, there is little evidence in literature as to whether this improves surgical outcomes in terms of complications, failure and patient satisfaction. This review aims to assess the available evidence as to whether there is a difference in surgical outcomes for breast reconstructions using ADM versus non-use of ADM. METHODS: A database search will be performed using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Clinicaltrials.org. The search timeframe will be 10 years. Studies will be screened using inclusion and exclusion criteria and data extracted into a standardised spreadsheet. Risk of bias will be assessed. Screening, extraction and risk-of-bias assessments will be performed independently by two reviewers and discrepancies discussed and rectified. Data analysis and meta-analysis will be performed using Microsoft Excel and R software. Forest plots will be used for two-arm studies to calculate heterogeneity and p-value for overall effect. DISCUSSION: With the renaissance of pre-pectoral IBBR, it is important that surgeons have adequate evidence available to assist operative decision-making. Assessing evidence in literature is important to help surgeons determine whether using ADM for IBBR is beneficial compared to non-use of ADM. This has potential impacts for patient complications, satisfaction and cost to healthcare trusts. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2023 CRD42023389072.

Breast reconstruction with mentor anatomical implants and the risk of implant rotation: A retrospective study of 1134 women.

BACKGROUND: Implant rotation is a known complication to breast reconstruction using anatomical implants. However, there is a lack of large studies investigating the risk of implant rotation and potential predisposing risk factors. METHOD: We reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent breast reconstruction with Mentor anatomical implants from 2010 to 2021 at two Danish hospitals. We compared the risk of implant rotation between one- and two-stage breast reconstruction using univariate logistic regression. We analyzed the effect of biological mesh, immediate versus delayed reconstruction, and use of a higher final expander volume than the permanent implant volume on the risk of implant rotation. Finally, we analyzed the success rate of revision surgery for implant rotation. RESULTS: In total, 1134 patients were enrolled. Patients who underwent two-stage breast reconstruction (n = 720) had a significantly higher risk of implant rotation than those who underwent one-stage breast reconstruction (n = 426; 11% vs. 5%, p < 0.01). There was no significant association between implant rotation and the use of biological mesh, immediate breast reconstruction, or use of a higher final expander volume than the permanent implant volume. The success rate of revision surgery after implant rotation was 73% (62/85 rotations). CONCLUSIONS: Two-stage breast reconstruction significantly increased the risk of implant rotation compared to one-stage breast reconstruction. The overall risk of implant rotation was low and success rate of revision surgery was high. These findings suggest that anatomical implants are safe to use for breast reconstruction. However, surgeons and patients should be aware of the increased risk of implant rotation after two-stage reconstruction.

A new type of dual-plane breast augmentation: Redefining parenchyma-muscle interface in high mobile glandular ptotic breast.

BACKGROUND: High mobile glandular ptotic breasts present the greatest challenge for implant breast augmentation with suboptimal outcomes occurring frequently. Here, we describe and evaluate an innovative approach for breast augmentation in this breast type. By widely disrupting and redefining the parenchyma-muscle interface, this technique offers opportunities to restore the takeoff point of the breast and improve the fullness of the upper pole, thus producing a "perkier" breast appearance. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed, and 68 patients who underwent breast augmentation with either type III dual-plane or the new approach between January 2015 and January 2021 were included. The patients were divided into two groups. The aesthetic outcome and patient satisfaction were evaluated using different 10-point rating forms. Data on demographic information, surgical details, and relative complication rates were recorded and compared. RESULTS: Upon comparing the aesthetic outcomes and satisfaction, the test group demonstrated better breast shape, nipple-areola position, upper pole contour outcome, and upper pole satisfaction. No post-operative hematoma, seroma, or infection occurred in either groups. No double-bubble deformity occurred in the test group, whereas it occurred in two patients in the control group. The rates of capsular contracture were 1.4% and 1.6%, in the test and control groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The new approach is a safe surgical method with good aesthetic outcome, high patient satisfaction, and long-lasting result. This approach is a supplement to the dual-plane techniques, to realize the benefits of mastopexy and type III dual-plane breast augmentation.

Augmentation mastopexy using the "double inner bra technique" (DIB) in post-bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Augmentation mastopexy has a 20-fold higher complication rate than primary augmentation. Performing augmentation mastopexy in post-bariatric patients poses an additional challenge owing to the reduced quality of the soft skin tissue. Therefore, it is technically complex and also fraught with complications. Implant dislocation, recurrent ptosis, wound healing problems with exposed implants, and the threat of implant loss are complications that must be prevented. METHODS: We present a case series study on our technique for stabilizing breast implants using the double inner bra technique (DIB) in which a laterobasal myofascial flap and an inferiorly based dermoglandular flap form a double inner bra for implant stabilization and protection. RESULTS: Thirty-seven cases were operated on using this technique from December 2020 to June 2023. No hematomas (0%), seromas (0%), infections (0%), and implant losses (0%) were recorded. Moreover, none of the patients had implant malposition (0%). With regard to recurrent ptosis mammae or waterfall deformity, 7 cases (2.6%) showed early ptosis within the first 3 months, and the number of ptosis decreased over time. Furthermore, 5 (1.81%) patients showed ptosis mammae after 6-12 months. Implant defect or rupture has not yet occurred (0%). CONCLUSION: The DIB is an easy-to-learn and versatile technique. It has low complication rates and can be used to achieve esthetically satisfactory mid- to long-term results.

Outcomes after elevation of serratus anterior fascia flap versus serratus muscle flap in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction following mastectomy: a prospective study.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative pain between SF flap and serratus anterior muscle (SM) in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study that included 53 women diagnosed with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy and one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction from January 2020 to March 2021. Twenty-nine patients (54.7%) had SF elevation, and 24 patients (45.3%) underwent SM elevation. We evaluated patient-reported early postoperative pain on the first day after surgery. Also, it was reported that all surgical complications in the first month and patient reported outcomes (PROs) were measured with the BRECON 23 questionnaire. Results: The serratus fascia group used implants with larger volumes, 407.6 ± 98.9 cc (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the fascial and muscular groups regarding the postoperative pain score reported by the patients (2 versus 3; p = 0.30). Also, there was no difference between the groups regarding early surgical complications and PROs after breast reconstruction. Conclusion: The use of SF seems to cause less morbidity, which makes the technique an alternative to be considered in breast reconstruction. Although there was no statistical difference in postoperative pain scores between the fascia and serratus muscle groups.

Unnecessary Explantation of IDEAL IMPLANT Structured Saline Breast Implants Prompted byRadiologic Misdiagnosis of Rupture.

ABSTRACT: The unique dual-lumen and baffle design of the IDEAL IMPLANT Structured Saline breast implant gives it specific advantages over both silicone gel-filled and the original saline-filled implants. This internal baffle structure also gives it an appearance on various radiologic imaging studies that may be misinterpreted as a rupture because of similarities to the well-known radiologic appearance of a ruptured silicone gel implant. Patients may present with various misinterpreted imaging studies, highlighting the need for plastic surgeons and radiologists to be familiar with the normal appearance of the intact IDEAL IMPLANT and be able to distinguish it from a ruptured IDEAL IMPLANT. The radiology findings must be correlated with the clinical findings, or an intact IDEAL IMPLANT misdiagnosed as ruptured, may cause unnecessary patient worry, and may prompt unnecessary surgery for removal or replacement.

Breast Reduction with Implants or Augmentation Reduction: Patient-Reported Outcomes from a Single-Centre Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

Background and Objectives: The correction of breast hypertrophy and ptosis with implant placement has always posed a challenge for plastic surgeons. Various methods have been devised, yielding conflicting results. The purpose of this study is to describe our surgical technique of breast reduction with silicone implants, present the safety profile of the procedure, and report patient-reported outcomes. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was performed on our case series of cosmetic breast surgery performed by the senior author between October 2020 and November 2023. Only patients who had over 300 g of breast tissue removed were included. The surgery and demographic characteristics were recorded. Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire about satisfaction with their breasts pre-operatively and after the surgery. Results: Over 745 cases were performed, and 25 were included in the analysis. In total, 78.3% of the patients presented with a Grade 3 ptosis. The mean implant size was 352.39 cc (range 300-455 cc). The breast tissue removed ranged from 312 to 657 g. The mean follow-up was 14.17 months. Only one case required revision surgery after developing capsular contracture and a waterfall deformity. Patients reported a statistically significant improvement across all domains of the questionnaire (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Breast reduction plus implants is a safe and effective alternative for patients with large ptotic breasts who wish to attain a full upper pole. It carries a similar risk profile to augmentation mastopexy and maintains its functional benefits in alleviating back, neck, and shoulder pain.

Impact of post-operative infection on revision procedures in breast reconstruction: A marketscan database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Esthetic complications, such as capsular contracture and soft-tissue contour defects, hinder the desired outcomes of breast reconstruction. As subclinical infection is a prevailing theory behind capsular contracture, we investigated the effects of post-operative infections on these issues and revision procedures. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective database study (2007-2021) on breast reconstruction patients from the MarketScan® Databases. Esthetic complications were defined by their associated revision procedures and queried via CPT codes. Severe capsular contracture (Grade 3-4) was defined as requiring capsulotomy or capsulectomy with implant removal or replacement. Moderate and severe soft-tissue defects were determined by the need for fat grafting or breast revision, respectively. Generalized linear models were used, adjusting for comorbidities and surgical factors (p < 0.05). RESULTS: We analyzed the data on 62,510 eligible patients. Post-operative infections increased the odds of capsulotomy (OR 1.59, p < 0.001) and capsulectomy (OR 2.30, p < 0.001). They also raised the odds of breast revision for severe soft-tissue defects (OR 1.21, p < 0.001). There was no significant association between infections and fat grafting for moderate defects. Patients who had post-operative infections were also more likely to experience another infection after fat grafting (OR 3.39, p = 0.0018). In two-stage reconstruction, infection after tissue expander placement was associated with greater odds of infection after implant placement. CONCLUSION: Post-operative infections increase the likelihood of developing severe soft-tissue defects and capsular contracture requiring surgical revision. Our data reinforce the role of infections in the pathophysiology of capsular contracture. Additionally, infections elevate the risk of subsequent infections after fat grafting for moderate defects, further increasing patient morbidity.

Outcomes of a same day discharge protocol in patients undergoing mastectomy and implant reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Finite hospital resources has required a closer look at resource allocation. This has prompted a shift toward same day surgeries and a focus on reducing hospital readmissions. Following the institution of a same day discharge protocol for mastectomy and mastectomy with immediate reconstruction, we sought to assess differences in the length of stay and readmission rates. METHODS: This retrospective review evaluates all cases of mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction performed at a single high-volume center between June 2019 and March 2021. Average length of stay, 30-day readmission rates, Anesthesia Society Assessment class, and type of immediate reconstruction were assessed. Autologous reconstructions were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 413 patients underwent mastectomy with or without reconstruction (n = 148 pre protocol and n = 265 during protocol) between June 2019 and March 2021. Of those 413 patients, 180 underwent reconstruction (n = 62 pre protocol and n = 118 during protocol). The average length of stay after mastectomy following the implementation of the same day discharge protocol was decreased at 0.6 days (n = 265) compared to preimplementation at 1.02 days (n = 148), p < 0.001. The 30-day readmission rate was not significant between the groups, p = 0.13. A total of 180 patients underwent immediate reconstruction after mastectomy. The average length of stay after mastectomy with immediate reconstruction following implementation of the same day discharge protocol was shorter than preimplementation at 1.05 days preimplementation (n = 62) versus 0.58 days following implementation (n = 118), p < 0.001; this finding was significant for both prepectoral and subpectoral implants, p < 0.001. There was no significant difference in 30-day readmission rates between the groups with immediate reconstruction, p = 0.34. CONCLUSION: Same day discharge for mastectomy with reconstruction is as safe as the more widely recognized same day discharge practice for patients with mastectomy alone.

Patients' Satisfaction After Breast Reconstruction Surgery Using Autologous versus Implants: A Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is a common disease that affects women globally and causes physical and emotional challenges. Breast reconstructive surgery aims to restore the shape of the breast after a mastectomy. Two common approaches used today are tissue-based or autologous and implant-based reconstruction. Autologous breast reconstruction has the advantage of being more affordable, but the resulting shape is less attractive. At the same time, the implant technique produces a more pleasing shape at a more expensive cost. OBJECTIVE: To compare the level of patients' satisfaction after breast reconstruction using the implant technique with the autologous technique using the Breast-Q questionnaire. METHODS: This research was a meta-analytic study to compare patients' satisfaction levels with breast reconstruction using the autologous technique compared with the implant technique. We searched several research articles from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2014 to 2023. Then, we conducted an analysis using Revman 5.4. The results of the study were presented in a forest plot diagram. RESULTS: From the search results, there were 3980 studies. Then, exclusion and inclusion were carried out, and the results obtained were 16 research articles. Of the 16 studies, analysis was then carried out, and the results obtained were satisfaction in breast patients with a sample size of 7284. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.55 (95% CI 0.41-0.68) p < 0.00001. Satisfaction with the reconstruction results with a sample size of 2935. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.48 (95% CI 0.28-0.69) p < 0.00001. Patients' sexual satisfaction with a sample size of 7149. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.27 (95% CI 0.17-0.37) p < 0.00001. Patients' satisfaction with nipple shapes with a sample of 426. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.22 (95% CI -0.00-0.44) p = 0.06. Patients' satisfaction with plastic surgeons with a sample size of 272. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.52 (95% CI 0.25-0.80) p= 0.0002. CONCLUSION: The autologous breast reconstruction technique is better than the implant-based reconstruction technique in terms of patient satisfaction with the breast, reconstruction outcome, sexual satisfaction, nipple shapes, and plastic surgeons based on the Breast-Q questionnaire. The findings of this comprehensive study indicate that breast cancer survivors who choose autologous reconstruction have higher levels of satisfaction across multiple domains than those who decide implant-based reconstruction.

The influence of a previous implant-based breast reconstruction on postoperative sensation of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap.

BACKGROUND: Implants and DIEP flaps have different outcomes regarding postoperative breast sensation. When compared to the preoperative healthy breast, implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) negatively influences postoperative breast sensation. However, it is currently unknown whether a prior IBBR also influences postoperative sensation of a replacing DIEP flap. The goal of this cohort study is to evaluate the influence of an IBBR on the postoperative sensation of a replacing DIEP flap. METHODS: Women were included if they received a DIEP flap reconstruction after mastectomy, with or without prior tissue expander (TE) and/or definitive breast implant. Sensation was measured at four intervals in 9 areas of the breast with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments: T0 (preoperative, implant/no reconstruction), T1 (2-7 months postoperative, DIEP), T2 (± 12 months postoperative, DIEP), Tmax (maximum follow-up, DIEP). Linear mixed-effects models were used to investigate the relationship between an implant/TE prior to the DIEP flap and recovery of breast sensation. RESULTS: 142 women comprising 206 breasts were included. 48 (23.3%) breasts did, and 158 (76.7%) breasts did not have a TE/IBBR prior to their DIEP. No statistically significant or clinically relevant relationships were found between a prior implant/TE and recovery of DIEP flap breast sensation for the flap skin, native skin, or total breast skin at T1, T2, or Tmax. There were also no relationships found after adjustment for the confounders radiation therapy, BMI, diabetes, age, flap weight, follow-up, and nerve coaptation. CONCLUSIONS: An implant/TE prior to a DIEP flap does not influence the recovery of postoperative breast sensation of the DIEP flap.

Association of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy With Postoperative Outcomes in Immediate Prepectoral Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by total mastectomy and immediate reconstruction has become an important strategy in the treatment of breast cancer. Although the safety of subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with NACT has been extensively evaluated, the safety in prepectoral reconstruction has not been clearly elucidated. We aimed to evaluate the association of NACT with immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent total mastectomy and immediate implant-based prepectoral breast reconstruction between May and December 2021 was conducted. Patients were categorized into 2 groups: those receiving NACT and those not receiving it. Postoperative complication rates were compared between the 2 groups. The independent association between NACT and the complication profiles was evaluated. Propensity score matching was also conducted. RESULTS: We analyzed 343 cases, including 85 who received NACT treatment and 258 who did not. Compared with the non-NACT group, the NACT group was younger, had a higher body mass index, and a higher rate of adjuvant radiotherapy. There were no differences in the rates of overall complications or type of complication between the 2 groups. In the multivariable logistic analyses, NACT did not show a significant association with the development of adverse outcomes. Similar results were observed in propensity score matching analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that receiving NACT may not have a significant detrimental effect on the postoperative outcomes of immediate prepectoral prosthetic reconstructions. Conducting prepectoral implant-based reconstruction in the setting of NACT might be safe and provide acceptable outcomes.

In hospital outcomes of autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common comorbid condition that can be associated with postoperative mortality and morbidity. However, the outcome profile of patients with COPD after breast reconstruction has yet to be established. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the postoperative outcomes in patients with COPD who underwent autologous (ABR) and implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who underwent ABR or IBR from Q4 2015 to 2020. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to compare inhospital outcomes between COPD and non-COPD patients while adjusting for demographics, primary payer status, hospital characteristics, and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were 1288 (9.92%) COPD and 11,696 non-COPD patients who underwent ABR. Meanwhile, 1742 (9.70%) COPD and 16,221 non-COPD patients underwent IBR. In both ABR and IBR, patients with COPD had higher rates of seroma (ABR, aOR = 1.863, 95% CI = 1.022-3.397, and p = 0.04; IBR, aOR = 1.524, 95% CI = 1.014-2.291, and p = 0.04), infection (ABR, aOR = 1.863, 95% CI = 1.022-3.397, and p = 0.04; IBR, aOR = 1.956, 95% CI = 1.205-3.176, and p = 0.01), and prolonged LOS (p < 0.01). Specifically, patients with COPD in ABR had higher risks of respiratory complications (aOR = 1.991, 95% CI = 1.291-3.071, and p < 0.01) and incurred higher total hospital charges (p < 0.01). Meanwhile, patients with COPD undergoing IBR had elevated risks of renal complications (aOR = 3.421, 95% CI = 2.108-5.55, and p < 0.01), deep wound complications (aOR = 3.191, 95% CI = 1.423-7.153, and p < 0.01), and a higher rate of transfers out (aOR = 1.815, 95% CI = 1.081-3.05, and p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: COPD is an independent risk factor associated with distinct adverse outcomes in ABR and IBR. These findings can be valuable for preoperative risk stratification, determining surgical candidacy, and planning postoperative management in patients with COPD.