Seroma Rates Are Not Increased When Combining Liposuction With Progressive Tension Suture Abdominoplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 619 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated that progressive tension sutures (PTS) reduce seroma. Many fear that adding liposuction to abdominoplasty will increase seroma rates and avoid drainless abdominoplasty when performing concomitant liposuction. OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify whether liposuction increases seroma in PTS and non-PTS abdominoplasty. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 619 patients underwent abdominoplasty between 2009 and 2017, of which 299 patients had drainless abdominoplasty with PTS and 320 had drain-based abdominoplasty. We compared complications among PTS patients with and without liposuction and among drain-based abdominoplasty patients with and without liposuction. RESULTS: Demographics were similar between PTS and drain patients and between liposuction and nonliposuction PTS. Mean liposuction volume with PTS was 1592 ± 1048 mL. Seroma in the PTS group was found to be 2.6%, which is consistent with previous data. PTS without liposuction had a rate of seroma of 6.67% compared to a rate of 2.2% with liposuction; these rates were not significantly different (P = 0.20). A total of 207 patients had drain-based abdominoplasty with liposuction, and 113 had it without liposuction. Seroma with liposuction was 9.17% and without liposuction was 6.19%, although these differences were not significant (P = 0.52). PTS lipoabdominoplasty had less seroma compared with drain-based lipoabdominoplasty (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Liposuction was performed in 80% of the patients, and patients with lipoabdominoplasty were not at a higher risk of seroma, in the drain group or the PTS group. More patients may allow validation that liposuction may actually be protective with PTS. Regardless, there is no increase in seroma with the addition of liposuction to PTS drainless abdominoplasty.

Surgical Lymphedema Treatment: A Meta-Analysis and Recommendations.

Background: Lymphedema is a common complication of lymph node surgery; however, evidence on diagnosing, monitoring, and treating the condition is sparse. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of common surgical treatments of lymphedema and provides suggestions for future research directions. Methods: A review of PubMed and Embase was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. All English-language studies published through June 1, 2020, were included. We excluded nonsurgical interventions, literature reviews, letters, commentaries, nonhuman or cadaver studies, and studies with inadequate sample size (N < 20). Results: A total of 583 cases from 15 studies in patients with lymphedema met our inclusion criteria for our 1-arm meta-analysis: 387 upper extremity treatments and 196 lower extremity treatments. The volume reduction rates of lymphedema for upper extremity and lower extremity treatments were 38.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 25.9%-50.2%] and 49.5% (95% CI, 32.6%-66.3%), respectively. The most common postoperative complications were cellulitis, reported in 4.5% of patients (95% CI, 0.9%-10.6%), and seromas, reported in 4.6% (95% CI, 0%-17.8%) of patients. Average quality of life measures across all studies improved by 52.2% (95% CI, 25.1%-79.2%) for patients who underwent upper extremity treatment. Conclusions: Surgical management of lymphedema shows great promise. Our data suggest that adopting a standardized system of limb measurement and disease staging can increase effectiveness of treatment outcomes.

Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction for Prevention of Secondary Lymphedema: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Secondary lymphedema remains one of the most notorious complications of axillary and pelvic lymph node surgery following mastectomy. There is a lack of high-level evidence found on the effectiveness of immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) in preventing secondary lymphedema. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of ILR for prevention of secondary lymphedema in patients undergoing different surgeries, and provides suggestions for lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA). METHODS: A review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All English-language studies published from January 1, 2009 to June 1, 2020 were included. We excluded non-ILR interventions, literature reviews/letters/commentaries, and nonhuman or cadaver studies. A total of 789 patients that were enrolled in 13 studies were included in our one-arm meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies (n=789) met inclusion criteria: upper extremity ILR (n=665) and lower extremity ILR (n=124). The overall incidence of lymphedema for upper extremity ILR was 2.7% (95%CI: 1.1%-4.4%) and lower extremity ILR was 3.6% (95%CI: 0.3%-10.1%). For upper extremity ILR, the average follow-up time was 11.6 ± 7.8 months and the LE incidence appeared to be the highest approximately 1 to 2 years postoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphedema is a common complication in cancer treatment. ILR, especially LYMPHA, may be an effective technique to facilitate lymphatic drainage at the time of the index procedure but future studies will be required to show its short-term efficacy and long-term outcomes.

Evidence-Based Wound Irrigation: Separating Fact from Fiction.

SUMMARY: The relationship between wound irrigation and healing has been recognized for centuries. However, there is little evidence and no official recommendations from any health care organization regarding best wound irrigation practices. This is the first review of wound irrigation that systematically summarizes the literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and distills the evidence into a practical format. In this comprehensive review, the authors outline the irrigation fluids and delivery methods used in the identified studies, analyze reported treatment outcomes, summarize irrigation effectiveness, and propose evidence-based guidelines to improve wound healing outcomes and enhance the consistency of wound irrigation. Thirty-one high-quality studies with a combined total of 61,808 patients were included. Based on the current evidence provided by this review, the authors propose the following guidelines: (1) acute soft-tissue wounds should receive continuous gravity flow irrigation with polyhexanide; (2) complex wounds should receive continuous negative-pressure wound therapy with instillation with polyhexanide; (3) infected wounds should receive continuous negative-pressure wound therapy with instillation with silver nitrate, polyhexanide, acetic acid, or povidone-iodine; (4) breast implant wounds should receive gravity lavage with povidone-iodine or antibiotics; and (5) surgical-site infection rates can be reduced with intraoperative povidone-iodine irrigation.

Evidence-Based Nutritional Interventions in Wound Care.

BACKGROUND: The role of nutritional intervention in wound care has been a topic of controversy. Although the efficacy of macronutrient supplementation has been well described, there is a paucity of evidence and no official recommendation regarding the use of vitamins and minerals to optimize wound healing. This is the first review of vitamin and mineral wound intervention that systematically summarizes the literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and distills the evidence by wound type. METHODS: In this comprehensive review, the authors outline the nutrients and delivery methods used in the identified studies, analyze reported treatment outcomes, summarize nutrient effectiveness, and propose evidence-based conclusions to improve wound healing outcomes and enhance the consistency of nutritional intervention in wound care. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies with a combined total of 2339 patients investigated the use of oral, topical, or intravenous vitamin and/or mineral supplementation for treatment of the following wound types: burn wounds (n = 3), pressure ulcers (n = 7), diabetic ulcers (n = 4), venous ulcers (n = 7), digital ulcers (n = 1), skin incisions (n = 9), hypertrophic scars (n = 4), and sinonasal wounds (n = 1). Improved outcomes were reported in patients with burn wounds receiving vitamins A, B1, B6, B12, D, and E and zinc, calcium, copper, magnesium, selenium, and zinc; patients with pressure ulcers receiving vitamin C and zinc; patients with diabetic ulcers receiving vitamin A, B9, D, and E; patients with venous ulcers receiving zinc; and patients with hypertrophic scars receiving vitamin E. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the high-level data provided in this review, the use of specific nutritional interventions may improve the outcome of certain wound types. Further investigation is warranted to draw definitive conclusions.

American Society of Plastic Surgeons Member Post-Operative Opioid Prescribing Patterns.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the widespread use of opioids in pain management, there are currently no evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of postoperative pain with opioids. Although other surgical specialties have begun researching their pain prescribing patterns, there has yet to be an investigation to unravel opioid prescribing patterns among plastic surgeons. METHODS: Survey Monkey was used to sample the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) members regarding their opioid prescribing practice patterns. The survey was sent randomly to 50% of ASPS members. Respondents were randomized to 1 of 3 different common elective procedures in plastic surgery: breast augmentation, breast reduction, and abdominoplasty. RESULTS: Of the 5,770 overall active ASPS members, 298 responses (12% response rate) were received with the following procedure randomization results: 106 for breast augmentation, 99 for breast reduction, and 95 for abdominoplasty. Overall, 80% (N = 240) of respondents used nonnarcotic adjuncts to manage postoperative pain, with 75.4% (N = 181) using nonnarcotics adjuncts >75% of the time. The most commonly prescribed narcotics were Hydrocodone with Acetaminophen (Lortab, Norco) and Oxycodone with Acetaminophen (Percocet, Oxycocet) at 42.5% (N = 116) and 38.1% (N = 104), respectively. The most common dosage was 5 mg (80.4%; N = 176), with 48.9% (N = 107) mostly dispensing 20-30 tablets, and the majority did not give refills (94.5%; N = 207). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, plastic surgeons seem to be in compliance with proposed American College of Surgeon's opioid prescription guidelines. However, there remains a lack of evidence regarding appropriate opioid prescribing patterns for plastic surgeons.

Breast cancer stem cells and the challenges of eradication: a review of novel therapies.

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease that accounts for 30% of all cancers diagnosed in women and over half a million deaths per year. Cancer stem cells (CSCs) make up a small subpopulation of cells within a tumor, are capable of self-renewal and, are responsible for tumor initiation, formation, and recurrence. Breast CSCs (BCSCs) have been the subject of concentrated research as potential targets for breast cancer therapies. Cell surface markers CD44+/CD24- have been established as minimum biomarkers for BCSCs and the upregulation of CD44 expression has been linked to tumor formation in numerous cancers. Additionally, the deregulation of Notch, Wnt/Frizzled/ß-catenin, Hippo, and Hedgehog signaling pathways is believed to be responsible for the formation of CSCs and lead to tumor formation. Tumor heterogeneity is a key feature of therapy resistance and a major challenge. CSCs are predominantly senescent and inherently immune to chemotherapy drugs which rely on an overactive cell cycle. Current therapeutic strategies include targeting CSC signaling pathways that play critical roles in self-renewal and defense. Anti-CD44 antibodies have been shown to induce terminal differentiation in CSCs resulting in a significant decrease in tumor metastasis. Additionally, targeting the tumor microenvironment has been shown to increase the effectiveness of chemotherapy drugs. In this review, we attempt to provide an overview of breast cancer, the stem of its cause, and novel therapies currently being explored.