Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventive Healing Approach for the Primary Prevention of Lymphedema: A 4-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) remains the leading cause of lymphedema nationally, and there is still no cure for the disease. The lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA) is a promising option for lymphedema prophylaxis in patients undergoing ALND, but long-term outcomes of the LYMPHA are not well established. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing ALND at their center from November of 2012 to November of 2016 and assembled two cohorts, those who received the LYMPHA and those who did not (non-LYMPHA). Patient data were collected to evaluate lymphedema risk and long-term lymphedema incidence of each group. RESULTS: Forty-five women were included in both our LYMPHA and non-LYMPHA cohorts. Mean body mass index (27.7 kg/m2 versus 29.9 kg/m2; P = 0.15) and radiation therapy rates (60.0% versus 68.9%; P = 0.51) did not differ between groups. Non-LYMPHA patients underwent complete mastectomy more frequently than LYMPHA patients (97.8% versus 77.8%; P = 0.007), but had a similar number of nodes removed during ALND (14.4 versus 15.8; P = 0.32). Median follow-up time was greater than 4 years for both LYMPHA and non-LYMPHA groups (57.0 months versus 63.0 months; P = 0.07). Overall, lymphedema incidence was 31.1% in the LYMPHA group and 33.3% in the non-LYMPHA group (P > 0.99). No significant differences in lymphedema incidences were observed between the LYMPHA and non-LYMPHA groups for patients with obesity, patients who received radiation therapy, or patients with obesity who also received radiation therapy (P > 0.05 for all subgroups). CONCLUSIONS: The LYMPHA may not prevent lymphedema long-term in patients who undergo ALND. More long-term studies are needed to determine the true potential of the procedure. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

In Search of an Ideal Closure Method: A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Octyl-2-Cyanoacrylate and Adhesive Mesh versus Subcuticular Suture in Reduction Mammaplasty.

BACKGROUND: An ideal wound closure system is one that is effective, consistent, and efficient. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of octyl-2-cyanoacrylate and mesh (Dermabond Prineo) in the closure of surgical wounds. This study compared the use of Prineo to use of subcuticular suture closure in reduction mammaplasty. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind study of patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty was performed. Each breast per patient was randomized to layered closure with Prineo or subcuticular sutures. Incisions were assessed at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Subjects completed the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale for each breast, and two blinded plastic surgeons evaluated scar quality using the Vancouver Scar Scale at each time point. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients participated in the study. On average, Prineo closure took 58.38 seconds (2.50 seconds/cm) and subcuticular closure took 444.76 seconds (18.94 seconds/cm). Prineo closure was approximately 6.8 times faster (p < 0.001) than subcuticular closure, saving an average of 6.4 minutes per incision. Vancouver Scar Scale scores were significantly better in patients with Prineo closure at 2 weeks (p = 0.026), although there was no difference in Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and Vancouver Scar Scale scores at all other time points. CONCLUSIONS: In reduction mammaplasty, Prineo closure results in similar scar quality and lower operative cost without increased complications when compared to subcuticular closure. Prineo is faster than subcuticular closure and represents an effective, consistent, and efficient alternative to subcuticular suture techniques. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.