Techniques in Nipple Areolar Reconstruction: A Retrospective Analysis of Surgical Interventions and Patient-reported Satisfaction Scores.

Background: Nipple areolar complex (NAC) reconstruction often signifies completion of the breast reconstruction process for some patients and has been shown to improve both psychosocial and sexual well-being. Several techniques have been described; however, there currently exists little evidence in the literature describing outcomes or patient satisfaction. Methods: A retrospective analysis of NAC reconstructions over the last decade was queried for patient demographics, operative technique, and postoperative outcomes. A standardized, validated survey was also utilized to evaluate overall satisfaction, with a focus on aesthetic outcome, shape, color, and projection. Results: Eighty-three patients were identified, with 49 (59.0%) completing the survey. The modalities used for reconstruction include the C-V flap (45.7%), the modified skate flap technique (42.2%), and free nipple grafting (FNG, 12.0%). No significant differences in age, BMI, or comorbidities were found among the three types. The most utilized donor site for skate flap reconstruction was the suprapubic area (37.1%). There were also no significant differences in complication rate (C-V 10.5%, FNG 10%, skate 5.7%, P = 0.630) or revision surgery (C-V 2.6%, FNG 0%, skate 5.7%, P = 0.732). The most common complication was nipple necrosis. Adjusting for time to follow-up using multivariate analysis, there was a significant difference in overall patient satisfaction when compared across all three techniques, with the modified skate flap having the highest mean overall satisfaction scores. Conclusions: NAC reconstruction can be completed safely and effectively with a variety of techniques. The modified skate flap technique was associated with high levels of patient satisfaction and a low complication rate.

Systolic Blood Pressure Less Than 120 mmHg is a Safe and Effective Method to Minimize Bleeding After Facelift Surgery: A Review of 502 Consecutive Cases.

BACKGROUND: Hematoma is the most common complication after facelift surgery. Hypertension is the major risk factor for hematoma following facelift. Measures taken to reduce systolic blood pressure perioperatively significantly reduce the risk of hematoma. There is evidence that treating systolic blood pressure of 140 mmHg or above reduces hematoma; there were no studies to date in which systolic blood pressures below 120 mmHg had been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of maintaining systolic blood pressures of 120 mmHg or less postoperatively to reduce hematoma after facelift. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of a single surgeon's series of facelift procedures from January 2004 to July 2018 was undertaken. Implementation of a more stringent perioperative blood pressure protocol (maintaining a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mmHg postoperatively) was initiated in January of 2013, dividing patients into 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 502 consecutive patients who underwent a facelift by F.N. were included in the study. A total of 319 patients underwent a facelift before 2013, and a total of 183 patients underwent a facelift in 2013 or later. Overall, a total of 13 hematomas occurred during the entire 15-year study period (2.59%), of which 12 occurred before the implementation of a strict blood pressure regimen (3.76%), and only 1 occurred after the new protocol (0.5%). There were no adverse events related to the lower blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Treating systolic blood pressure greater than 120 mmHg postoperatively is a safe and effective method for reducing the risk of hematoma after facelift.

Beyond Physical Well-being: Exploring Demographic Variances in Psychosocial Well-being before Breast Reconstruction.

A patient's preoperative satisfaction with their breasts and baseline psychosocial, sexual, and physical well-being are important considerations when planning breast reconstruction. We sought to elucidate variances in preoperative responses among patients undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Methods: Preoperative BREAST-Q responses and demographic data, including race, generation, median household incomeinstitutional review board and body mass index (BMI) were collected from breast cancer patients scheduled for mastectomy. Associations between demographic group and survey response were analyzed by chi-square or independent t-tests. Results: In total, 646 of 826 patients identified had complete data and were included in the final analysis. Patients in BMI group 1 (16-24.9) were more likely to report feeling "very satisfied" with how they looked unclothed compared with patients in other BMI groups (P = 0.031). Conversely, patients in groups 3 and 4 (35+), reported lower satisfaction (P = 0.037) and felt less attractive without clothes (P = 0.034). Asian women were less likely to feel attractive (P = 0.007), and Black patients were less likely to feel of equal worth to other women (P < 0.001). Finally, patients were less likely to report confidence in social settings if they were Black (P < 0.001), Asian (P < 0.001), from the millennial generation (P = 0.017), or living in zip codes with median household income less than $55,000 (P = 0.042). Conclusions: Breast cancer patients' feelings toward their natural breasts vary widely between demographic groups. Understanding baseline psychosocial factors in this population is key to informing preoperative discussions and interpreting postoperative satisfaction.

Close the GAPS: A Standardized Perioperative Protocol Reduces Breast Reconstruction Implant Infections.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is a complex process with significant practice variability. Infections after IBBR are associated with higher rates of readmission, reoperation, and reconstructive failure. To reduce process variability and postoperative infections, the authors implemented an evidence-based, standardized protocol for IBBR. METHODS: The protocol was applied to all patients undergoing IBBR at a single institution from December of 2019 to February of 2021. Intraoperative protocol adherence was recorded, and infection events were considered minor (managed with outpatient antibiotics) or major (managed with readmission or reoperation). A historic control group was retrospectively analyzed for comparison. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients (120 breasts) in the protocol group were compared with 159 patients (269 breasts) in the retrospective group. No differences were found in demographic characteristics, comorbidities, or type of reconstruction (expander versus implant). Intraoperative protocol adherence was 80.5% (SD, 13.9%). Overall infection rate was significantly lower in the protocol group versus controls (8.7% versus 17.0%; P < 0.05). When dichotomized, protocol patients had a lower rate of both minor (2.9% versus 5.7%; P = 0.99) and major (5.8% versus 11.3%; P = 0.09) infections, although this was not statistically significant. Rate of reconstructive failure secondary to infection was significantly lower in the protocol group (4.4% versus 8.8%; P < 0.05). Among protocol patients, those without infection had higher protocol adherence (81.5% versus 72.2%; P < 0.06), which neared statistical significance. CONCLUSION: A standardized perioperative protocol for IBBR reduces process variability and significantly decreases rate of overall infections and reconstructive failure secondary to infection. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Drain Removal Time in Pre-pectoral versus Dual Plane Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction following Nipple-sparing Mastectomy.

Pre-pectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has become a popular approach compared with the dual plane technique. Our objective was to determine if there was a difference in time to postoperative breast drain removal in direct-to-implant or tissue expander reconstruction following NSM when comparing pre-pectoral with dual plane technique. Methods: A total of 200 patients (335 breasts) received NSM followed by implant or expander reconstruction at our institution between the years 2009 and 2020. Direct-to-implant reconstruction had 113 pre-pectoral versus 67 dual plane, and tissue expander reconstruction had six pre-pectoral versus 149 dual plane. Our analysis included age at mastectomy, body mass index, history of preoperative breast radiation, and smoking history. Case complications included seroma or hematoma, breast or axillary infection requiring antibiotics or operative washout, device replacement due to extrusion or infection, skin necrosis, and capsular contracture. Statistical analysis was completed with Pearson chi-square test, Fisher exact test, and the two-sample T-test using IBM SPSS Statistics 24.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y.). Results: The average time until breast drain removal in dual plane implant patients was significantly less than in pre-pectoral implant patients (9.42 versus 14.01 days). The average time until breast drain removal in dual plane expander patients was significantly less than in pre-pectoral expander patients (11.47 versus 20.30 days). Conclusion: In both implant and expander reconstruction following NSM, patients receiving dual plane device placement had a shorter postoperative time until breast drain removal when compared with patients receiving pre-pectoral device placement.

Incidence and Outcomes of Completion Mastectomy following Oncoplastic Reduction: A Case Series.

Background: Patients occasionally need completion mastectomy (CM) following oncoplastic reduction for various reasons necessitating definitive reconstructive techniques. The purpose of this study was to evaluate those patients who required CM following oncoplastic reduction and evaluate indications, technique, and outcomes. Methods: Patients who underwent a completion mastectomy at some time point following the oncoplastic reduction were identified. Factors that influenced CM and additional reconstruction were analyzed. All statistical analysis was conducted using the IBM SPSS Statistics 27.0 (IBM Corp.). Results: A total of 29 patients (5.3%) underwent CM during the study period with an average follow-up of 3 years since the original procedure. The most common reasons were positive margins (20/29, 69.0%) and recurrence (8/29, 27.6%). Twenty-two had reconstructive procedures (75.9%) and seven did not (24.1%). The patients who underwent CM and reconstruction were significantly younger (49.2 years) than those who had no reconstruction (64.3 years, P = 0.004). The most common type of reconstruction was transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM)/deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap (12/22, 54.5%), followed by latissimus (6/22, 27.3%) and tissue expander (3/22, 13.6%). The complication rate in the CM group was 24% (N = 7/29), which included two seromas (6.9%), followed by infection, fat necrosis, mastectomy skin necrosis, and donor site necrosis (3.4% each). Conclusions: Completion mastectomy is indicated typically for positive margins or recurrence. Reconstruction is performed more frequently in younger patients, with the TRAM/DIEP flap and latissimus dorsi reconstruction being the most common technique.

Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Breast Reconstruction Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Minority patients and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds are faced with barriers to care regarding breast reconstruction. With this study, we seek to elucidate variances in demographics to determine predictors of complications in implant-based breast reconstruction. METHODS: Patients who underwent breast reconstruction with either direct to implant or immediate expander reconstruction by 1 surgeon were identified using the preoperative Breast-Q.Current income statistics available from the US Census Bureau by self-reported zip code were used to determine the median household income (MHI) to stratify differing socioeconomic backgrounds. Demographics were compared with body mass index, comorbidities, overall rate of postoperative complications, rate of implant infection, and type of reconstruction. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-five patients met inclusion criteria. Overall rate of complications and rate of breast implant infection was higher for MHI of less than $50,000 compared with greater than $50,000 (P = 0.043 overall complications 40.20% vs 28.8%) (P = 0.04 implant infection 14.4% vs 7.1%). African American patients had higher body mass index (P = <0.001), rates of HTN (P = <0.001), and diabetes (P = 0.001), and were more likely to have a lower income (P = <0.001). There was, however, no difference in overall complications (P = 0.26), implant infection rate (P = 0.994), or capsular contracture (0.367) based on race. There was no difference in rate of comorbidities between low and high socioeconomic areas. CONCLUSION: This cohort demonstrates a higher rate of overall complications and infection in patients with a lower MHI and no difference based on race despite having higher risk factors for complications.Socioeconomic status is a multifaceted barrier to care that must be addressed in the perioperative period to decrease breast implant associated complications.

Preventing Infection in Implant-based Breast Reconstruction: Evaluating the Evidence for Common Practices and Standardized Protocols.

Infection following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) results in increased rates of hospital readmission, reoperation, patient and hospital expenses, and reconstructive failure. IBBR is a complex, multistep procedure, and there is a relative lack of high-quality plastic surgery evidence regarding "best practices" in the prevention of implant infections. In the absence of strong data, standardizing procedures based on available evidence can reduce error and improve efficacy and outcomes. Methods: We performed a focused literature review of the available evidence supporting specific interventions for infection prevention in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of care that are applicable to IBBR. In addition, we examined previously published standardized perioperative protocols for implant reconstruction. Results: Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative planning and organization is crucial in IBBR. Preoperative planning involves skin decolonization in advance of surgery with either chlorhexidine gluconate or mupirocin. Intraoperative methods that have shown potential benefit include double-gloving, breast pocket irrigation, separate closing instruments, and the utilization of "no-touch" techniques. In the postoperative period, the duration of drain removal and postoperative antibiotic administration play an important role in the prevention of surgical site infection. Conclusions: There is a crucial need to establish an evidence-based set of "best practices" for IBBR, and there exists a paucity of evidence in the breast literature. These data can be utilized to develop a standardized protocol as part of a rigorous quality improvement methodology.

Beyond the Scalpel: Attracting and Nurturing Surgeon-Scientists in Plastic Surgery.

SUMMARY: With plastic surgery being at the forefront of innovation and discovery in multiple research disciplines, plastic surgery is poised for M.D./Ph.D. and research-focused M.D. trainees to be attracted to this field. Surprisingly, recent reports have shown that the number of surgeon-scientists pursuing research is on the decline, with these declines being even more pronounced within plastic surgery. It is essential that plastic surgery remains a leader in translational research by cultivating a group of individuals who have been trained in basic research and are thereby competitive to obtain extramural grant funding. To address this need, the authors review data elucidating why the research-oriented trainee may forego pursuing a career in plastic surgery. Although much of the existing literature is speculative, the authors identified the current number of M.D./Ph.D.s in plastic surgery using data obtained from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and investigated number of grants in plastic surgery compared to other medical and surgical fields using the National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results. The authors hypothesize that economic constraints and difficulty securing protected research time may be contributing to fewer trainees pursuing plastic surgery. The purpose of this article is (1) to discuss potential reasons deterring research-oriented trainees from pursuing careers as surgeon-scientists within plastic surgery; (2) to propose solutions that may attract more trainees interested in careers as surgeon-scientists to the field of plastic surgery; (3) to highlight the lack of quantitative data regarding surgeon-scientist training in plastic surgery; and (4) to propose and encourage future research avenues to help attract and nurture surgeon-scientists in plastic surgery.

A Systematic Review of Breast Irrigation in Implant-Based Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Aesthetic and reconstructive implant-based breast surgeries are some of the most frequently performed procedures by plastic surgeons. As such, prevention of implant infection is of high importance. However, there remains no criterion-standard protocol for irrigation of the breast pocket. This review focuses on current irrigation practices in implant-based breast surgery. METHODS: Four databases were used to search for all studies, including randomized controlled trials, retrospective cohort, and prospective cohort, containing original data related to the outcomes investigated in this study. Search terms included "breast," "irrigation," and "infection" in different combinations to isolate studies that focused on irrigation methods in both reconstructive and augmentation surgeries. Our selection criteria specifically concentrated on those studies that explicitly related irrigation procedures to rates of clinical infection and/or capsular contracture. Each was compiled into a table in chronological order to make comparisons between the differing irrigation methods. RESULTS: Our search returned 239 full-text articles eligible for our review. Two independent screeners identified 9 studies that met the inclusion criteria. This included 1 prospective study and 8 retrospective studies. Two studies reported the use of chlorhexidine gluconate irrigation resulting in protection from clinical infection. Two studies investigated the role of triple antibiotic solution (TAS) either alone or combined with something else on risk of infection, and 3 reported TAS use on rates of capsular contracture. Two additional studies investigated the role of single antibiotic irrigation, concluding that some antibiotic regimen for irrigation may be sufficient in the breast pocket. Interestingly, one study noted the potential use of povidone-iodine (Betadine) as a method of irrigation. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that chlorhexidine gluconate, Betadine, and TAS irrigation of the breast pocket can provide protection against infection and implant loss in both reconstruction and augmentation surgeries.

The impact of axillary node surgery on outcomes following immediate breast reconstruction.

Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has become the most common method for postmastectomy reconstruction. Axillary lymph node dissection is performed for the staging of patients, but the impact of IBR with nodal surgery on postoperative complications remains elusive. The present study aims to investigate the impact of concomitant axillary lymph node surgery on postoperative complications. We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent IBR from 2000 to 2014. We recorded and analyzed patient data to determine the association between nodal surgery and postsurgical complications. Univariate and multivariate analyses were utilized to elucidate the risk of a complication given nodal surgery, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and type of incision for nodal access. A total of 986 breast reconstructions were included for analysis. Overall incidence of postoperative complications per breast that received nodal surgery was 35.9% (n = 230/642), compared to 25.6% (n = 88/344) in breasts that did not have concomitant nodal surgery (P = .001). Nodal surgery was found to increase risk of all complications with an odds ratio of 1.62 (P = .001). Moreover, complications were significantly higher in patients whose nodes were accessed via mastectomy incision (39.4%) when compared to a separate incision (33.5%). Multivariate analysis showed that nodal sampling through the mastectomy incision is a significant risk factor for seroma, with an odds ratio of 3.60 (P = .002). We did not observe differences in breast complications in patients who underwent SLNB vs ALND. These factors should be taken into account in the approach to breast reconstruction during lymphadenectomy.

Gut-Resident Lactobacilli Activate Hepatic Nrf2 and Protect Against Oxidative Liver Injury.

Many studies have suggested a role for gut-resident microbes (the "gut microbiome") in modulating host health; however, the mechanisms by which they impact systemic physiology remain largely unknown. In this study, metabolomic and transcriptional profiling of germ-free and conventionalized mouse liver revealed an upregulation of the Nrf2 antioxidant and xenobiotic response in microbiome-replete animals. Using a Drosophila-based screening assay, we identified members of the genus Lactobacillus capable of stimulating Nrf2. Indeed, the human commensal Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) potently activated Nrf2 in the Drosophila liver analog and the murine liver. This activation was sufficient to protect against two models of oxidative liver injury, acetaminophen overdose and acute ethanol toxicity. Characterization of the portal circulation of LGG-treated mice by tandem mass spectrometry identified a small molecule activator of Nrf2, 5-methoxyindoleacetic acid, produced by LGG. Taken together, these data demonstrate a mechanism by which intestinal microbes modulate hepatic susceptibility to oxidative injury.