The Critical Blood-Sparing Effect of Tranexamic Acid (TXA) in Liposuction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been used to improve bleeding outcomes in many surgical procedures. However, its blood-sparing effect in liposuction is not well established. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Central, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WorldWideScience.org databases from their inception to October 8, 2021, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The authors focused on 3 main topics: 1) TXA, 2) liposuction, and 3) complications. We included articles evaluating the potential blood-sparing effects of TXA in liposuction. Studies were excluded if they were systematic review articles or protocol papers, animal studies, conference abstracts, survey studies, or non-English publications. Results: A total of 711 articles were identified, with 1 retrospective and 4 prospective (3 randomized) studies meeting our inclusion criteria. TXA was used in various forms: administered intravenously either on induction or after the procedure, mixed into the tumescent solution, or infiltrated into the liposuction sites after lipoaspiration. A significantly smaller reduction in hematocrit was noted in the TXA group compared with that in the non-TXA group (p<0.001) despite a significantly greater amount of lipoaspirate removed in the TXA group (p<0.001). Patients in non-TXA cohorts experienced adverse effects (such as seroma and need for transfusion) that were not seen in TXA cohorts. Conclusion: TXA use in patients undergoing liposuction seems to be associated with a beneficial blood-sparing effect, which may enhance safety in this population. Future studies should aim to determine the optimal route and dosing for TXA in liposuction. Evidence Based Medicine: Level IV.

Perioperative Concerns in the Patient with History of Alcohol Use.

Alcohol use is common in patients presenting for surgery and can result in significant physiologic changes and postoperative complications. Anesthesia providers must be aware of the potential risks associated with alcohol consumption and take steps to minimize them. Perioperative management includes assessing patients for alcohol use, providing alcohol cessation interventions, adjusting the anesthetic plan according to the patient's alcohol use history, providing appropriate pain management strategies, and closely monitoring patients during and after surgery for signs of alcohol withdrawal.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures for advanced skin cancer patients.

Many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to study quality of life (QOL) in the skin cancer population. Advanced melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) may be associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and treatment side effects; however, it is unclear which PROM is valid and appropriate to use in these populations for both clinical and research purposes. We aimed to identify the PROMs that have been used to measure QOL in advanced skin cancer patients and determine which of these PROMs have been validated to assess QOL outcomes in this population. A PubMed and EMBASE search was conducted from its inception to March 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines with a comprehensive list of search terms under three main topics: (1) PROM; (2) advanced skin cancer; and (3) staging and interventions. We included articles utilizing a PROM measuring QOL and having a patient population with advanced skin cancer defined as melanoma stage > T1a or non-melanoma AJCC stage T3 or greater. Advanced skin cancer patients were also defined as those with metastasis or requiring adjuvant therapy (systemic chemotherapy, radiation, and immunotherapy). Studies were excluded according to the following criteria: mix of low-risk and advanced skin cancer patients in the study population without stratification into low-risk and advanced groups, stage T1a melanoma or mix of stages without stratification, low-risk NMSC, no PROM (i.e., study specific questionnaires), non-English publication, review article or protocol paper, conference abstract, or populations including non-skin cancers. A total of 1,998 articles were identified. 82 met our inclusion criteria resulting in 22 PROMs: five generic health-related (QWB-SA, AQoL-8D, EQ-5D, SF-36, and PRISM), six general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-C36, LASA, IOC, Rotterdam Symptom Checklist, and FACT-G), nine disease-focused or specialized (EORTC QLQ-H&N35, EORTC QLQ-MEL38, EORTC QLQ-BR23, Facial Disability Index, FACT-H&N, FACT-BRM, FACT-B, FACT-M, and scqolit), and two general dermatology (Skindex-16 and DLQI) PROMs. All PROMs have been generally validated except for EORTC QLQ-MEL38. Only two PROMs have been validated in the advanced melanoma population: FACT-M and EORTC QLQ-C36. No PROMS have been validated in the advanced NMSC population. The PROMs that were validated in the advanced melanoma population do not include QOL issues unique to advanced skin tumors such as odor, bleeding, itching, wound care burden, and public embarrassment. Breast cancer and head and neck cancer instruments were adapted but not validated for use in the advanced skin cancer population due to the lack of an adequate instrument for this population. This study highlights the need for PROM instrument validation or creation specifically geared toward the advanced skin cancer population. Future studies should aim to develop and validate a PROM to assess QOL in this population.

The Baltodano Breast Reduction Score: A Nationwide, Multi-Institutional, Validated Approach to Reducing Surgical-Site Morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Breast reduction remains associated with significantly higher rates of overall morbidity, superficial surgical-site infections, and wound disruptions. The authors developed a validated risk model to identify patients at higher risk for postoperative surgical-site morbidity after breast reduction. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all women undergoing breast reduction from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2005 to 2012 data. Surgical-site morbidity included surgical-site infection and wound disruption events. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression identified risk factors associated with surgical-site morbidity. The model was validated using bootstrap replications (n = 100) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, and converted into the Baltodano breast reduction score, a clinical risk tool predictive of surgical-site morbidity. RESULTS: The authors identified 7068 breast reductions. Rate of 30-day surgical-site morbidity was 3.98 percent. Independent risk factors included resident participation (OR, 1.5; 95 percent CI, 1.1 to 2.0; p = 0.004), body mass index (for every 5-unit increase: OR, 1.3; 95 percent CI, 1.1 to 1.4; p < 0.001), smoking (OR, 1.6; 95 percent CI, 1.1 to 2.4; p = 0.014), steroid use (OR, 3.5; 95 percent CI, 1.4 to 8.4; p = 0.006), and operation in the third quarter of the year (OR, 1.5; 95 percent CI, 1.1 to 1.9; p = 0.014). The factors were integrated into the Baltodano score, ranging from 0 to 16. The predicted probability of surgical-site morbidity associated with each risk score was estimated. Predicted and observed risks of surgical-site morbidity were highly comparable. CONCLUSIONS: The authors present the Baltodano breast reduction score, a validated risk-stratification tool for predicting 30-day surgical-site morbidity following breast reduction using data that are readily available to the clinician. This may allow targeted screening and intervention in high-risk patients, better counseling, selective resident participation, and ultimately a decrease in overall health care costs. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Preoperative Radiotherapy Is Not Associated with Increased Post-mastectomy Short-term Morbidity: Analysis of 77,902 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NRT) enhances breast-conserving surgery outcomes, reducing local recurrence of breast cancer and increasing median survival. However, its effect on postoperative morbidity remains under-studied. We sought to assess the impact of NRT on 30-day postoperative morbidity after mastectomy. METHODS: We analyzed data from women undergoing mastectomy (with or without immediate reconstruction) using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) 2005-2011 datasets. ACS-NSQIP is a prospective, risk-adjusted, outcomes-based registry. Data included demographic and perioperative factors. Outcomes studied included surgical site (wound and prosthesis/flap complications), systemic (cardiac, respiratory, neurological, urinary, and venous thromboembolism events), and overall morbidity. Logistic regression was used to estimate the unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) and adjusted odds ratio (aOR) between NRT and postoperative 30-day morbidity. RESULTS: The study population included 77,902 women, of which 61,039 (78.4%) underwent mastectomy only and 16,863 (21.6%) underwent mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. NRT was administered to 266 (0.4%) mastectomy-only and 75 (0.4%) immediate breast reconstruction patients. In the mastectomy-only group, there were no significant differences in the rates of postoperative surgical site morbidity (aOR = 1.41; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.76-2.63; P = 0.276), systemic morbidity (aOR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.40-1.26; P = 0.252), and overall morbidity (aOR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.54-1.33; P = 0.477) between NRT and control groups. Similarly, no significant differences were found for these three outcomes in the immediate breast reconstruction population. Statistical power for every comparison was >80%. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that NRT is not associated with significantly higher 30-day postoperative complications among breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction.

The Effect of Timing on Breast Reconstruction Outcomes in Diabetic Women.

BACKGROUND: This study examines the effect of timing (immediate vs delayed) on postoperative morbidity in diabetic women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy. METHODS: We reviewed the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) databases from 2005 to 2012 for all diabetic women undergoing breast reconstruction. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the risk of 30-day overall complications in the immediate versus delayed cohorts. Additionally, we retrospectively reviewed outcomes for all Johns Hopkins Hospital diabetic patients undergoing breast reconstruction from 2005 to 2014. RESULTS: In the NSQIP, 1,408 diabetic women underwent breast reconstruction: 958 (68%) immediate and 450 (32%) delayed. In the immediate group, 10.75% of patients developed a 30-day overall complication, compared with 7.78% of patients in the delayed group. On multivariable analysis, the odds of developing 30-day overall complications were significantly higher (adjusted odds ratio = 1.68; P = 0.033) for the immediate compared with the delayed cohort. In the Johns Hopkins Hospital cohort, 114 reconstructions were performed in 52 diabetic women: 59 (51.8%) immediate and 55 (47.2%) delayed. On long-term follow-up (median = 16.5 months), 41.0% of immediate reconstructions developed a surgical complication compared with 27.8% of delayed reconstructions. Deep infections (P = 0.026), seroma formation (P = 0.003), reconstruction failure (P = 0.001), and reoperation rates (P = 0.001) were significantly increased in the immediate cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Among diabetics seeking breast reconstruction, delaying the reconstructive surgery from the mastectomy is associated with decreased postoperative morbidity. It also appears that the 30-day postoperative time point available in the NSQIP does not fully reflect the magnitude of the long-term complications these diabetic patients will develop.