Premastectomy Radiotherapy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Premastectomy radiotherapy (PreMRT) is a new treatment sequence to avoid the adverse effects of radiotherapy on the final breast reconstruction while achieving the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction (IMBR). Objective: To evaluate outcomes among patients who received PreMRT and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a phase 2 single-center randomized clinical trial conducted between August 3, 2018, and August 2, 2022, evaluating the feasibility and safety of PreMRT and RNI (including internal mammary lymph nodes). Patients with cT0-T3, N0-N3b breast cancer and a recommendation for radiotherapy were eligible. Intervention: This trial evaluated outcomes after PreMRT followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (40.05 Gy/15 fractions) or conventionally fractionated (50 Gy/25 fractions) RNI. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was reconstructive failure, defined as complete autologous flap loss. Demographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected, and associations between multiple variables and outcomes were evaluated. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis. Results: Fifty patients were enrolled. Among 49 evaluable patients, the median age was 48 years (range, 31-72 years), and 46 patients (94%) received neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Twenty-five patients received 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the breast and 45 Gy in 25 fractions to regional nodes, and 24 patients received 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions to the breast and 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions to regional nodes, including internal mammary lymph nodes. Forty-eight patients underwent mastectomy with IMBR, at a median of 23 days (IQR, 20-28.5 days) after radiotherapy. Forty-one patients had microvascular autologous flap reconstruction, 5 underwent latissimus dorsi pedicled flap reconstruction, and 2 had tissue expander placement. There were no complete autologous flap losses, and 1 patient underwent tissue expander explantation. Eight of 48 patients (17%) had mastectomy skin flap necrosis of the treated breast, of whom 1 underwent reoperation. During follow-up (median, 29.7 months [range, 10.1-65.2 months]), there were no locoregional recurrences or distant metastasis. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found PreMRT and RNI followed by mastectomy and microvascular autologous flap IMBR to be feasible and safe. Based on these results, a larger randomized clinical trial of hypofractionated vs conventionally fractionated PreMRT has been started (NCT05774678). Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02912312.

Development of a core set of outcome measures to be applied toward breast cancer-related lymphedema core outcome domains.

PURPOSE: For breast cancer survivors (BCS) living with breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL), what outcome measures (OMs) are recommended to be used to measure standardized outcome domains to fully assess the burden of the disease and efficacy of interventions? An integral component of a standardized core outcome set (COS) are the OMs used to measure the COS. METHODS: A supplemental online survey was linked to a Delphi study investigating a COS for BCRL. OMs were limited to a maximum of 10 options for each outcome domain (OD). There were 14 ODs corresponding to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework and respondents rated the OMs with a Likert level of recommendation. The feasibility of the listed OMs was also investigated for most outpatient, inpatient, and research settings. RESULTS: This study identified 27 standardized OMs with a few ODs having 2-3 highly recommended OMs for proper measurement. A few of the recommended OMs have limitations with reliability due to being semi-quantitative measures requiring the interpretation of the rater. CONCLUSION: Narrowing the choices of OMs to 27 highly recommended by BCRL experts may reduce selective reporting, inconsistency in clinical use, and variability of reporting across interdisciplinary healthcare fields which manage or research BCRL. There is a need for valid, reliable, and feasible OMs that measure tissue consistency. Measures of upper extremity activity and motor control need further research in the BCS with BCRL population.

Development of a core outcome set for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a Delphi study.

PURPOSE: For breast cancer survivors (BCS) living with breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL), what outcome domains (OD) should be measured to assess the burden of the disease and efficacy of interventions? A Core Outcome Set (COS) that promotes standardized measurement of outcomes within the constraints of time influenced by work environments is essential for patients and the multidisciplinary professionals that manage and research BCRL. METHODS: Using Delphi methodology, a multidisciplinary group of BCRL experts (physical and occupational therapists, physicians, researchers, physical therapist assistants, nurses, and massage therapist) completed two waves of online surveys. BCRL expert respondents that completed the first survey (n = 78) had an average of 26.5 years in practice, whereas, respondents who completed the second survey (n = 33) had an average of 24.9 years. ODs were included in the COS when consensus thresholds, ranging from 70% to 80%, were met. RESULTS: A total of 12 ODs made up the COS. Reaching a minimum consensus of 70%; volume, tissue consistency, pain, patient-reported upper quadrant function, patient-reported health-related quality of life, and upper extremity activity and motor control were recommended at different phases of the BCRL continuum in a time-constrained environment. Joint function, flexibility, strength, sensation, mobility and balance, and fatigue met an 80% consensus to be added when time and resources were not constrained. CONCLUSION: The COS developed in this study thoroughly captures the burden of BCRL. Using this COS may reduce selective reporting, inconsistency in clinical use, and variability of reporting across interdisciplinary healthcare fields, which manage or research BCRL.

Axillary Nodal Metastases Conversion and Perioperative Complications with Neoadjuvant Pembrolizumab Therapy in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is known to portend a worse prognosis compared with same-stage, hormone receptor-positive disease. However, with the recent change in practice to include pembrolizumab in neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for TNBC, an increase in pathologic complete responses (pCRs) has been reported. The perioperative repercussions of adding pembrolizumab to standard NAC regimens for TNBC are currently unknown. We aimed to explore the perioperative implications of adding pembrolizumab to standard NAC regimens for non-metastatic TNBC. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the perioperative outcomes in patients with non-metastatic TNBC treated with pembrolizumab-NAC from January 2018 to October 2022 conducted at a high-volume cancer center. Patient demographics, comorbidities, clinical and pathological staging, NAC treatment regimen, initiation, and completion, as well as date of surgery and postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 87 patients, 67.8% had an overall pCR and 86% had an axillary pCR; 37.2% of cN+ patients were spared from axillary lymph node dissection. However, 24.1% of patients experienced surgical complications, 9% of patients were receiving steroids at the time of breast surgery secondary to adverse effects of pembrolizumab-NAC, and 7% underwent a change in the initial surgical plan such as omission of reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab-NAC has not only significant oncologic benefit but also noteworthy perioperative implications in the surgical management of TNBC.

Pre- and Post-Microsurgical Rehabilitation Interventions and Outcomes on Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: a Systematic Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a debilitating progressive disease resulting in various impairments and dysfunctions. Complete decongestive therapy embodies conservative rehabilitation treatments for BCRL. Surgical procedures performed by plastic and reconstructive microsurgeons are available when conservative treatment fails. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate which rehabilitation interventions contribute to the highest level of pre- and post-microsurgical outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies published between 2002 and 2022 were grouped for analysis. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022341650) and followed the PRISMA guidelines. Levels of evidence were based upon study design and quality. The initial literature search yielded 296 results, of which, 13 studies met all inclusion criteria. Lymphovenous bypass anastomoses (LVB/A) and vascularized lymph node transplant (VLNT) emerged as dominant surgical procedures. Peri-operative outcome measures varied greatly and were used inconsistently. There is a dearth of high quality literature leading to a gap in knowledge as to how BCRL microsurgical and conservative interventions complement each other. Peri-operative guidelines are needed to bridge the knowledge and care gap between lymphedema surgeons and therapists. A core set of outcome measures for BCRL is vital to unify terminological differences in the multidisciplinary care of BCRL. Complete decongestive therapy embodies conservative rehabilitation treatments for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). Surgical procedures performed by microsurgeons are available when conservative treatment fails. This systematic review investigated which rehabilitation interventions contribute to the highest level of pre- and post-microsurgical outcomes. Thirteen studies met all inclusion criteria and revealed that there is a dearth of high quality literature leading to a gap in knowledge as to how BCRL microsurgical and conservative interventions complement each other. Furthermore, peri-operative outcome measures were inconsistent. Peri-operative guidelines are needed to bridge the knowledge and care gap between lymphedema surgeons and therapists.

Long-term Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes Comparing Skin-Preserving, Staged Versus Delayed Microvascular Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Skin-preserving, staged, microvascular, breast reconstruction often is preferred in patients requiring postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) but may lead to complications. We compared the long-term surgical and patient-reported outcomes between skin-preserving and delayed microvascular breast reconstruction with and without PMRT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy and microvascular breast reconstruction between January 2016 and April 2022. The primary outcome was any flap-related complication. The secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes and tissue-expander complications. RESULTS: We identified 1002 reconstructions (672 delayed; 330 skin-preserving) in 812 patients. Mean follow-up was 24.2 ± 19.3 months. PMRT was required in 564 reconstructions (56.3%). In the non-PMRT group, skin-preserving reconstruction was independently associated with shorter hospital stay (ß - 0.32, p = 0.045) and lower odds of 30-days readmission (odds ratio [OR] 0.44, p = 0.042), seroma (OR 0.42, p = 0.036), and hematoma (OR 0.24, p = 0.011) compared with delayed reconstruction. In the PMRT group, skin-preserving reconstruction was independently associated with shorter hospital stay (ß - 1.15, p < 0.001) and operative time (ß - 97.0, p < 0.001) and lower odds of 30-days readmission (OR 0.29, p = 0.005) and infection (OR 0.33, p = 0.023) compared with delayed reconstruction. Skin-preserving reconstruction had a 10.6% tissue expander loss rate and did not differ from delayed reconstruction in terms of patient-reported satisfaction with breast, psychosocial well-being, or sexual well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Skin-preserving, staged, microvascular, breast reconstruction is safe regardless of the need for PMRT, with an acceptable tissue expander loss rate, and is associated with improved flap outcomes and similar patient-reported quality of life to that of delayed reconstruction.

Ensuring Safety While Achieving Beauty: An Evidence-Based Approach to Optimizing Mastectomy and Autologous Breast Reconstruction Outcomes in Patients with Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Although obesity has previously been associated with poor outcomes after mastectomy and breast reconstruction, its impact across the WHO obesity classification spectrum and the differential effects of various optimization strategies on patient outcomes have yet to be delineated. We sought to examine the impact of WHO obesity classification on intraoperative surgical and medical complications, postoperative surgical and patient-reported outcomes of mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction, and delineate outcomes optimization strategies for obese patients. STUDY DESIGN: This is a review of consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction from 2016 to 2022. Primary outcomes were complication rates. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes and optimal management strategies. RESULTS: We identified 1,640 mastectomies and reconstructions in 1,240 patients with mean follow-up of 24.2 ± 19.2 months. Patients with class II/III obesity had higher adjusted risk of wound dehiscence (odds ratio [OR] 3.20; p < 0.001), skin flap necrosis (OR 2.60; p < 0.001), deep venous thrombosis (OR 3.90; p < 0.033), and pulmonary embolism (OR 15.3; p = 0.001) than nonobese patients. Obese patients demonstrated significantly lower satisfaction with breasts (67.3 ± 27.7 vs 73.7 ± 24.0; p = 0.043) and psychological well-being (72.4 ± 27.0 vs 82.0 ± 20.8; p = 0.001) than nonobese patients. Unilateral delayed reconstructions were associated with independently shorter hospital stay (ß -0.65; p = 0.002) and lower adjusted risk of 30-day readmission (OR 0.45; p = 0.031), skin flap necrosis (OR 0.14; p = 0.031), and pulmonary embolism (OR 0.07; p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Obese women should be closely monitored for adverse events and lower quality of life, offered measures to optimize thromboembolic prophylaxis, and advised on the risks and benefits of unilateral delayed reconstruction.

Pre-epithelialized cryopreserved tracheal allograft for neo-trachea flap engineering.

Background: Tracheal reconstruction presents a challenge because of the difficulty in maintaining the rigidity of the trachea to ensure an open lumen and in achieving an intact luminal lining that secretes mucus to protect against infection. Methods: On the basis of the finding that tracheal cartilage has immune privilege, researchers recently started subjecting tracheal allografts to "partial decellularization" (in which only the epithelium and its antigenicity are removed), rather than complete decellularization, to maintain the tracheal cartilage as an ideal scaffold for tracheal tissue engineering and reconstruction. In the present study, we combined a bioengineering approach and a cryopreservation technique to fabricate a neo-trachea using pre-epithelialized cryopreserved tracheal allograft (ReCTA). Results: Our findings in rat heterotopic and orthotopic implantation models confirmed that tracheal cartilage has sufficient mechanical properties to bear neck movement and compression; indicated that pre-epithelialization with respiratory epithelial cells can prevent fibrosis obliteration and maintain lumen/airway patency; and showed that a pedicled adipose tissue flap can be easily integrated with a tracheal construct to achieve neovascularization. Conclusion: ReCTA can be pre-epithelialized and pre-vascularized using a 2-stage bioengineering approach and thus provides a promising strategy for tracheal tissue engineering.

Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of 694 Two-Stage Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Breast Reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: Opinion regarding the optimal plane for prosthetic device placement in breast reconstruction patients has evolved. The purpose of this study was to assess the differences in complication rates and patient satisfaction between patients who underwent prepectoral and subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent two-stage IBR at their institution from 2018 to 2019. Surgical and patient-reported outcomes were compared between patients who received a prepectoral versus a subpectoral tissue expander. RESULTS: A total of 694 reconstructions in 481 patients were identified (83% prepectoral, 17% subpectoral). The mean body mass index was higher in the prepectoral group (27 versus 25 kg/m 2 , P = 0.001), whereas postoperative radiotherapy was more common in the subpectoral group (26% versus 14%, P = 0.001). The overall complication rate was very similar, with 29.3% in the prepectoral and 28.9% in the subpectoral group ( P = 0.887). Rates of individual complications were also similar between the two groups. A multiple-frailty model showed that device location was not associated with overall complications, infection, major complications, or device explantation. Mean scores for Satisfaction with the Breast, Psychosocial Well-Being, and Sexual Well-Being were similar between the two groups. Median time to permanent implant exchange was significantly longer in the subpectoral group (200 versus 150 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prepectoral breast reconstruction results in similar surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction compared with subpectoral IBR. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Outcomes of Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction After Oncologic Resection: 14-Year Experience at an NCI-Designated Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes studies for abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) in the setting of previous oncologic extirpation are lacking. We sought to evaluate long-term outcomes of AWR using acellular dermal matrix (ADM) after extirpative resection, compare them to primary herniorrhaphy, and report the rates and predictors of postoperative complications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent AWR after oncologic resection from March 2005 to June 2019 at a tertiary cancer center. The primary outcome was hernia recurrence (HR). Secondary outcomes included surgical site occurrences (SSOs), surgical site infection (SSIs), length of hospital stay (LOS), reoperation, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Of 720 consecutive patients who underwent AWR during the study period, 194 (26.9%) underwent AWR following resection of abdominal wall tumors. In adjusted analyses, patients who had AWR after extirpative resection were more likely to have longer LOS (ß, 2.57; 95%CI, 1.27 to 3.86, p < 0.001) than those with primary herniorrhaphy, but the risk of HR, SSO, SSI, 30-day readmission, and reoperation did not differ significantly. In the extirpative cohort, obesity (Hazard ratio, 6.48; p = 0.003), and bridged repair (Hazard ratio, 3.50; p = 0.004) were predictors of HR. Radiotherapy (OR, 2.23; p = 0.017) and diabetes mellites (OR, 3.70; p = 0.005) were predictors of SSOs. Defect width (OR, 2.30; p < 0.001) and mesh length (OR, 3.32; p = 0.046) were predictors of SSIs. Concomitant intra-abdominal surgery for active disease was not associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: AWR with ADM following extirpative resection demonstrated outcomes comparable with primary herniorrhaphy. Preoperative risk assessment and optimization are imperative for improving outcomes.

Harnessing the synergy of perfusable muscle flap matrix and adipose-derived stem cells for prevascularization and macrophage polarization to reconstruct volumetric muscle loss.

Muscle flaps must have a strong vascular network to support a large tissue volume and ensure successful engraftment. We developed porcine stomach musculofascial flap matrix (PDSF) comprising extracellular matrix (ECM) and intact vasculature. PDSF had a dominant vascular pedicle, microcirculatory vessels, a nerve network, well-retained 3-dimensional (3D) nanofibrous ECM structures, and no allo- or xenoantigenicity. In-depth proteomic analysis demonstrated that PDSF was composed of core matrisome proteins (e.g., collagens, glycoproteins, proteoglycans, and ECM regulators) that, as shown by Gene Ontology term enrichment analysis, are functionally related to musculofascial biological processes. Moreover, PDSF-human adipose-derived stem cell (hASC) synergy not only induced monocytes towards IL-10-producing M2 macrophage polarization through the enhancement of hASCs' paracrine effect but also promoted the proliferation and interconnection of both human skeletal muscle myoblasts (HSMMs) and human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) in static triculture conditions. Furthermore, PDSF was successfully prevascularized through a dynamic perfusion coculture of hASCs and HUVECs, which integrated with PDSF and induced the maturation of vascular networks in vitro. In a xenotransplantation model, PDSF demonstrated myoconductive and immunomodulatory properties associated with the predominance of M2 macrophages and regulatory T cells. In a volumetric muscle loss (VML) model, prevascularized PDSF augmented neovascularization and constructive remodeling, which was characterized by the predominant infiltration of M2 macrophages and significant musculofascial tissue formation. These results indicate that hASCs' integration with PDSF enhances the cells' dual function in immunomodulation and angiogenesis. Owing in part to this PDSF-hASC synergy, our platform shows promise for vascularized muscle flap engineering for VML reconstruction.

Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomographic Reverse Lymphatic Mapping for Groin Vascularized Lymph Node Transplant Planning.

BACKGROUND: Superficial inguinal (groin) vascularized lymph node transplantation is the most common option for the treatment of lymphedema, particularly in combination with free abdominal flap breast reconstruction. This study examines the utility of single-photon emission computed tomographic (SPECT/CT) lymphoscintigraphy for lower extremity reverse lymphatic mapping in presurgical planning for groin vascularized lymph node transplantation and appraises the physiologic lymphatic drainage to the superficial inguinal lymph nodes. METHODS: All patients who underwent bilateral lower extremity SPECT/CT reverse lymphatic mapping over a 5-year period were included. Retrospective case note analysis was performed to collect demographic, surgical, and outcomes data. RESULTS: The study included 84 patients; 56 of these subsequently underwent groin vascularized lymph node transplantation (58 flaps). Fifty-four of these flaps were combined with free abdominal flaps for breast reconstruction (55 flaps). Using SPECT/CT reverse lymphatic mapping investigation of 168 inguinal regions, drainage to at least one superficial inguinal region was visualized in 38.1 percent of patients; in 13.1 percent, drainage was visualized to both superficial inguinal regions. Using this information for presurgical planning, groin vascularized lymph node flap harvest was performed from the contralateral side in 57 of 58 cases (98.3 percent) using intraoperative gamma probe guidance, and no patient developed donor lower extremity lymphedema during follow-up (mean ± SD, 34.5 ± 15.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: The authors' use of presurgical SPECT/CT reverse lymphatic mapping together with limited flap dissection and intraoperative gamma probe guidance resulted in no clinical cases of iatrogenic donor lower extremity lymphedema. The high incidence of drainage from the lower extremity to the superficial inguinal region mandates the use of reverse lymphatic mapping when performing groin vascularized lymph node transplantation. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of breast conservation and reconstruction after mastectomy using BREAST-Q.

AIMS: Patients' post-operative wellbeing determines the impact and effectiveness of breast reshaping and reconstruction procedures. The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare four different types of breast reconstruction: bilateral therapeutic mammaplasty, DIEP flap, ELD with immediate lipomodelling and implant-based reconstruction using BREAST-Q. METHODS: Patients who underwent breast reconstruction by one of the above-mentioned methods were identified from a retrospective register and sent BREAST-Q questionnaires. Univariate and multivariate analysis of BREAST-Q scores and clinical characteristics were performed for identifying trends between and within groups. RESULTS: A total of 240 patients were identified with a response rate of 57%. Patients receiving implants were statistically less satisfied with breast reconstruction (mean 57%) and tended to be younger with lower BMI in comparison to other groups. There were no statistical differences in psychosocial wellbeing or patient experience between groups. Despite the fact that clinically these groups were heterogeneous, satisfaction with breast was similar in the remaining three autologous groups (range 70-75%). Detailed analysis and interpretation of quality-of-life scores, clinical differences and trends identified in the multivariate analysis along with nuances between surgical techniques used in our unit for breast reshaping and reconstruction, have been performed. CONCLUSIONS: The most important goal of breast reconstruction is to restore patients' quality of life and satisfaction with breast. Identifying factors which can potentially predict poor outcomes will improve the informed consent process and patient selection.

Jejunal Mesenteric Vascularized Lymph Node Transplantation for Lymphedema: Outcomes and Technical Modifications.

BACKGROUND: The jejunal mesentery supplied by the superior mesenteric vascular tree has emerged as a viable site for vascularized lymph node transplantation. Among other benefits, it has the advantage of avoidance of the risk of donor-site lymphedema. This article reports the technique and outcomes of a novel approach to jejunal mesenteric vascularized lymph node transplantation with flap harvest from the mesenteric root to reduce the risk of small bowel ischemic complications. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients that underwent jejunal mesenteric vascularized lymph node transplantation to treat upper extremity lymphedema were included. Preoperative and postoperative measurements were taken at fixed intervals using standardized techniques including Perometer volumetry, LDex bioimpedance spectroscopy, the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale, and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand tool. Demographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected, and descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: There were 25 patients included, all of whom had maximized their conservative therapy before undergoing surgery. At 12 months postoperatively reduction in limb volume difference was 36.7 percent (p < 0.001), reduction in LDex score was 41.4 percent (p = 0.0015), and reductions in the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores were 55.7 percent (p = 0.0019) and 47.5 percent (p = 0.027), respectively. In 11 patients, there was a history of cellulitis (multiple episodes in eight), and at up to 24 months' follow-up postoperatively there were no episodes reported (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Upper extremity lymphedema can be effectively treated surgically using the jejunal mesenteric vascularized lymph node transplantation, resulting in reduced limb volume and extracellular fluid, and improved patient-reported limb function and outcomes measures compared with optimized conservative therapy alone. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Outcomes and technical modifications of vascularized lymph node transplantation from the lateral thoracic region for treatment of lymphedema.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates clinical outcomes of vascularized lymph node transplantation (VLNT) from the lateral thoracic region and technical modifications. METHODS: Consecutive patients that underwent lateral thoracic VLNT to treat extremity lymphedema were included. Demographic and treatment data were recorded, and outcomes data including limb volume, LDex score, and Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (LLIS), QuickDASH, and LEFS questionnaires, were collected prospectively. Consecutive patients that underwent single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT/CT) lymphoscintigraphy axillary reverse lymphatic mapping (RLM) were analyzed to characterize the physiological drainage of the normal upper extremity. RESULTS: A consecutive series of 32 flaps were included. At 24 months postoperatively mean reduction in limb volume excess was 47.2% (±11.6; p = 0.0085), LDex score was 63.1% (±8.5; p < 0.001), and LLIS score was 65.1% (±7.4; p < 0.001). Preoperatively 14/31 patients (45.2%) reported cellulitis, and postoperatively there were no episodes at up to 24 months (p < 0.001). No patient developed donor extremity lymphedema at mean 18.6 (±8.3) months follow-up. SPECT/CT-RLM of 182 normal axillae demonstrated that the sentinel lymph node(s) of the upper extremity was consistently anatomically located in the upper outer quadrant of the axilla (97%). CONCLUSIONS: VLNT from the lateral thoracic region is effective and versatile for the treatment of lymphedema with a low donor site complication rate.

Microvascular Breast Reconstruction in the Era of Value-Based Care: Use of a Cosurgeon Is Associated with Reduced Costs, Improved Outcomes, and Added Value.

BACKGROUND: Reducing complications while controlling costs is a central tenet of value-based health care. Bilateral microvascular breast reconstruction is a long operation with a relatively high complication rate. Using a two-surgeon team has been shown to improve safety in bilateral microvascular breast reconstruction; however, its impact on cost and efficiency has not been robustly studied. The authors hypothesized that a cosurgeon for bilateral microvascular breast reconstruction is safe, effective, and associated with reduced costs. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent bilateral microvascular breast reconstruction with either a single surgeon or surgeon/cosurgeon team over an 18-month period. Charges were converted to costs using the authors' institutional cost-to-charge ratio. Surgeon opportunity costs were estimated using time-driven activity-based costing. Propensity scoring controlled for baseline characteristics between the two groups. A locally weighted logistic regression model analyzed the cosurgeon's impact on outcomes and costs. RESULTS: The authors included 150 bilateral microvascular breast reconstructions (60 single-surgeon and 90 surgeon/cosurgeon reconstructions) with a median follow-up of 15 months. After matching, the presence of a cosurgeon was associated with a significantly reduced mean operative duration (change in operative duration, -107 minutes; p < 0.001) and cost (change in total cost, -$1101.50; p < 0.001), which was even more pronounced when surgeon/cosurgeon teams worked together frequently (change in operative duration, -132 minutes; change in total cost, -$1389; p = 0.007). The weighted logistic regression models identified that a cosurgeon was protective against breast-site complications and trended toward reduced overall and major complication rates. CONCLUSION: The practice of using a of cosurgeon appears to be associated with reduced costs and improved outcomes, thereby potentially adding value to bilateral microvascular breast reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Measurement Properties of the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale.

Background: The updated Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (LLIS, version 2) has been widely used to evaluate the effect of lymphedema from the patient's perspective. We sought to assess its ability to accurately and efficiently measure lymphedema-related impact using modern psychometric techniques. Methods and Results: We collected a total of 1054 patient-reported outcome measure scores from 285 patients with upper extremity lymphedema and 65 patients with lower extremity lymphedema between 2016 and 2020. We first evaluated the relationship between the LLIS score, L-Dex score, and limb volume difference (LVD), and used classical test and item response theories to assess its psychometric performance. The LLIS score was only very weakly associated with LVD (r = 0.17, p < 0.001) and L-Dex score (r = 0.22, p < 0.001). The LLIS had acceptable dimensionality. Items 7 (affects body image) and 16 (affects proper fit of clothing/shoes) were locally dependent (Yen's Q3 = 0.45). Eight of the 17 items was interpreted differently between upper and lower limb lymphedema patients (pseudo R2 ≥ 0.01). The scoring structure required correction for items 9 (affects intimate relations) and 12 (manages lymphedema). Removing items 18 (infection occurrence) and 7 resulted in substantially improved item response theory model fit (Tucker-Lewis index = 0.93, comparative fix index = 0.95, root mean square error of approximation = 0.07, and root means square of the residual = 0.06). The relationships between the LLIS and objective measures of lymphedema remained weak following modification (LVD; r = 0.13, p = 0.01, L-Dex; r = 0.26, p < 0.001). Conclusion: We were able to slightly improve the psychometric properties of the LLIS. However, these improvements did not rectify apparent issues with construct validity and both versions of the LLIS displayed a weak relationship with objective measures of lymphedema severity.