Timing of Unplanned Reoperation After Lower Extremity Free Flap Reconstruction: What Are the Roles of Procedure Indication and Defect Etiology?

BACKGROUND: Advancements in lower extremity (LE) microsurgery have allowed for the expansion of indications for LE reconstructions. This project aims to better understand the temporal pattern and risk factors associated with LE free flap failure based on the clinical indication. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed all patients undergoing LE free flap reconstruction from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2012-2019 prospectively collected data to determine rates and timing of reoperation. Free flaps were stratified by indication, type, and timing of reoperation. Weibull survival models were used to compare rates of takebacks among time intervals. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors for unplanned reoperation. RESULTS: Four hundred seven of LE free flaps were analyzed. There was a 14.5% rate (59/407) of unplanned reoperation within the first 30 postoperative days (PODs) after surgery. When stratified by the indication necessitating reoperation, patients with an underlying vascular indication had the highest rate of reoperation (40.9%). The reoperation rates were significantly different between indications (P < 0.05) The mean daily proportion of patients experiencing reoperation was highest during POD 0 to 2 (1.47% reoperations per day), which dropped significantly during POD 3 to 10 (0.55% per day) and again during POD 11 to 30 (0.28% per day, P < 0.05). African American race as well as malignant, prosthetic/implant, and wound/infectious indications were significant independent predictors for unplanned reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Lower extremity reconstruction is an important reconstructive option for the coverage of a myriad of defects. Understanding the differences between postoperative reoperation timelines among indication subtypes is important for updated flap monitoring protocols, optimizing ERAS pathways, and beginning dangle protocols.

Significant Reduction in Length of Stay in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction With Implementation of Multimodal ERAS Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) implementation achieves earlier recovery, reduced hospital length of stay (LOS) and improved outcomes in patients undergoing deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) free flaps. We sought to review our ERAS protocols and their impact on our patients' LOS compared with the literature. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of a single surgeon's experience from 2017 to 2021 of patients undergoing DIEP free-flap breast reconstruction with LOS as the primary outcome. Complication rates and patient demographics are described as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one patients underwent DIEP free-flap breast reconstruction. After adapting ERAS protocols, there has been a 0.98 [SD, 0.17; confidence interval [CI], -1.3 to -0.64; P < 0.001) day decrease in length of stay comparing pre-ERAS to post-ERAS implementation. Length of stay has routinely decreased from an average discharge on day 4.17 (SD, 1.1; range, 3-8 days) in 2017 to discharge on day 2.91 (SD, 1.1; range, 1-5 days) in 2021. Seventy-five percent of patients in 2021 were hospitalized for 3 or fewer days compared with 75% of patients in 2017 hospitalized for 4 or more days. One patient experienced a flap failure. Our study supports successful discharge on postoperative days 2-3 compared with postoperative days 3-4 in the current literature. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of our ERAS protocol for DIEP free-flap breast reconstruction has resulted in a shorter LOS compared with contemporary literature. The ERAS protocols can be efficiently adopted in microsurgical DIEP breast reconstruction to achieve a shorter LOS without jeopardizing patient outcomes.

High and Low Frequency Domino Liver Transplantation Centers Demonstrate Similar Performance Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: A Domino Liver Transplant (DLT) is a successfully validated surgical option for a subset of patients awaiting liver transplant. Increased utilization of DLTs could increase the donor organ pool. However, DLTs occur primarily at a small number of high volume centers, and are rarely performed at lower volume transplant centers. This study compares DLT recipient performance outcomes between high frequency DLT centers and low frequency DLT centers. METHODS: The UNOS/OPTN STAR database was queried for DLTs performed at transplant centers between 1996-2018. 193 patients were identified and categorized into high (>5 DLTs) or low (≤5 DLTs) frequency centers. Our primary endpoint was allograft survival. Our secondary endpoints were graft status at last follow up and mortality secondary to cardiac, renal, or respiratory failure. RESULTS: Overall median allograft survival between high and low volume DLT centers was similar (48.2 months versus 42.7 months, P >0.314). The one-year (82% versus 76%), three-year (57% versus 56%), and five-year (45% versus 43%) survival percentages were also similar between the high and low volume DLT centers respectively. Overall mortality from cardiac (high 4% versus low 1.7%), renal (high 0.8% versus low 1.7%), or respiratory failure (high 0.8% versus low 1.7%) was similarly low in both groups. CONCLUSION: Low volume and high volume DLT centers are associated with similar outcomes of allograft survival and mortality. DLTs should be utilized more frequently, when the criteria are met, including in centers with limited experience, to expand the donor pool, decrease time on the waitlist, and improve overall survival.

Nationally Validated Scoring System to Predict Unplanned Reoperation and Readmission after Breast Reduction.

BACKGROUND: Reduction mammoplasty continues to be a commonly sought procedure with complication rates ranging from 4.3 to 8.2%. In the current study, we sought to identify the clinical and preoperative risk factors for unplanned reoperation and readmission within the first postoperative month on a national scale. METHODS: Patients who underwent reduction mammoplasty from the ACS-NSQIP 2012-2019 database were analyzed to determine rates of reoperation and readmission within 30 days of the initial breast surgery. The cohort was divided into 60 and 40% random testing and validation samples. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was then performed to isolate independent factors of unplanned readmission and reoperation using the testing sample (n = 22,743). The predictors were weighted according to beta coefficients to develop an integer-based clinical risk score predictive of complications. This system was then validated using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis of the validation sample (n = 15,162). RESULTS: A total of 37,905 reduction mammoplasties were analyzed. 1.3% of patients had an unplanned readmission. Independent risk factors for unplanned readmission included age older than the median of 44 years (p < 0.01), inpatient procedure (p < 0.01), smoking (p < 0.01), hypertension (p = 0.01), COPD (p < 0.05), BMI ≥ 35 (p < 0.01), and operation time greater than the median of 142 minutes ( p < 0.01). The factors were integrated into a scoring system, ranging from 0 to 36, and an ROC analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.66. 1.9% of patients underwent unplanned reoperation. Independent risk factors for unplanned reoperation in this population included age older than the median of 44 years (p < 0.01), inpatient status (p < 0.01), and a history of bleeding disorders (p < 0.05). The factors were integrated into a scoring system, ranging from 0 to 25, and the ROC analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.61. CONCLUSIONS: We present a validated scoring system to better inform patients about their risk for unplanned reoperation and readmission following reduction mammoplasty. This system will enable surgeons to optimize patient selection and interventions in order to decrease morbidity and unnecessary health-care expenditure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Pain Control after Reduction Mammaplasty with Combination Bupivacaine and Dexamethasone Regional Block: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: There are many approaches to pain control in reduction mammaplasty. Preoperative bupivacaine regional blocks control pain relatively inexpensively ($0.07/mL), but last only 8 hours. A liposomal bupivacaine formulation lasts 72 hours but can be costly ($17.21/mL). Orthopedic and thoracic operations have demonstrated that dexamethasone ($0.44/mL) plus bupivacaine can prolong analgesia. The authors conducted a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial to determine whether dexamethasone plus bupivacaine regional block improves postoperative pain control, reduces inpatient narcotic use, and improves patient satisfaction. METHODS: Female patients were randomized into control and experimental groups. Both groups received preoperative modified block of the pectoral nerves: bupivacaine plus saline (control group) or bupivacaine plus dexamethasone (experimental group). Postoperative pain regimens were standardized. Vital signs, pain scores, narcotic consumption, and antiemetic use were recorded throughout the hospitalization. Quality-of-life surveys were distributed at the first postoperative visit. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients completed the study: 25 control and 26 experimental group patients. The experimental group averaged lower pain scores, although there was no statistically significant difference overall or at each 4-hour interval. Postoperative narcotic use was significantly lower in the experimental group (mean, 23.2 oral morphine equivalents versus 36.6 oral morphine equivalents per patient; P = 0.026). There were no differences in 4-hour interval vital signs, antiemetic use, or length of stay. Survey results showed enhanced quality of life in the experimental group, but this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dexamethasone to bupivacaine in the preoperative modified block of the pectoral nerves block before bilateral reduction mammaplasty resulted in significantly less narcotic consumption in the hospital. This can be a cost-effective adjunct for postoperative pain control. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Cancer screening and management in the transgender population: Review of literature and special considerations for gender affirmation surgery.

BACKGROUND: Literature focused on cancer screening and management is lacking in the transgender population. AIM: To action to increase contributions to the scientific literature that drives the creation of cancer screening and management protocols for transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of PubMed on January 5th, 2022, with the following terms: "TGNC", OR "transgender", OR "gender non-conforming", OR "gender nonbinary" AND "cancer screening", AND "breast cancer", AND "cervical cancer", AND "uterine cancer", AND "ovarian cancer", AND "prostate cancer", AND "testicular cancer", AND "surveillance", AND "follow-up", AND "management". 70 unique publications were used. The findings are discussed under "Screening" and "Management" categories. RESULTS: Screening: Current cancer screening recommendations default to cis-gender protocols. However, long-term gender-affirming hormone therapy and loss to follow-up from the gender-specific specialties contribute to a higher risk for cancer development and possible delayed detection. The only known screening guidelines made specifically for this population are from the American College of Radiology for breast cancer. Management: Prior to undergoing Gender Affirmation Surgery (GAS), discussion should address cancer screening and management in the organs remaining in situ. Cancer treatment in this population requires consideration for chemotherapy, radiation, surgery and/or reconstruction. Modification of hormone therapy is decided on a case-by-case basis. The use of prophylactic vs aesthetic techniques in surgery is still debated. CONCLUSION: When assessing transgender individuals for GAS, a discussion on the future oncologic risk of the sex-specific organs remaining in situ is essential. Cancer management in this population requires a multidisciplinary approach while the care should be highly individualized with considerations to social, medical, surgical and gender affirming surgery related specifications. Special considerations have to be made during planning for GAS as surgery will alter the anatomy and may render the organ difficult to sample for screening purposes. A discussion with the patient regarding the oncologic risk of remaining organs is imperative prior to GAS. Other special considerations to screening such as the conscious or unconscious will to unassociated with their remaining organs is also a key point to address. We currently lack high quality studies pertinent to the cancer topic in the gender affirmation literature. Further research is required to ensure more comprehensive and individualized care for this population.

Use of Needle Localization in the Surgical Management of Non-seroma, Mass-forming BIA-ALCL.

Outcomes related to the treatment of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, a rare extranodal T-cell lymphoma associated with textured breast implants, are largely dependent on the successful resection to negative margins via en bloc capsulectomy and resection of any associated masses. To date, the use of needle localization, a common technique used in breast surgery, to assist in the complete removal of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma has not been described. We present the case report of a 66-year-old woman, with a previous medical history of left-sided invasive ductal carcinoma, who presented 7 years after textured breast implant placement with a left-sided mass without peri-implant seroma. Biopsy demonstrated breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma and the associated breast mass extended beyond the capsule borders. The present report describes the novel use of needle localization in this patient to facilitate the complete removal of the malignancy-associated mass with maximal preservation of the overlying soft tissue envelope.