A Systematic Review of Breast Irrigation in Implant-Based Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Aesthetic and reconstructive implant-based breast surgeries are some of the most frequently performed procedures by plastic surgeons. As such, prevention of implant infection is of high importance. However, there remains no criterion-standard protocol for irrigation of the breast pocket. This review focuses on current irrigation practices in implant-based breast surgery. METHODS: Four databases were used to search for all studies, including randomized controlled trials, retrospective cohort, and prospective cohort, containing original data related to the outcomes investigated in this study. Search terms included "breast," "irrigation," and "infection" in different combinations to isolate studies that focused on irrigation methods in both reconstructive and augmentation surgeries. Our selection criteria specifically concentrated on those studies that explicitly related irrigation procedures to rates of clinical infection and/or capsular contracture. Each was compiled into a table in chronological order to make comparisons between the differing irrigation methods. RESULTS: Our search returned 239 full-text articles eligible for our review. Two independent screeners identified 9 studies that met the inclusion criteria. This included 1 prospective study and 8 retrospective studies. Two studies reported the use of chlorhexidine gluconate irrigation resulting in protection from clinical infection. Two studies investigated the role of triple antibiotic solution (TAS) either alone or combined with something else on risk of infection, and 3 reported TAS use on rates of capsular contracture. Two additional studies investigated the role of single antibiotic irrigation, concluding that some antibiotic regimen for irrigation may be sufficient in the breast pocket. Interestingly, one study noted the potential use of povidone-iodine (Betadine) as a method of irrigation. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that chlorhexidine gluconate, Betadine, and TAS irrigation of the breast pocket can provide protection against infection and implant loss in both reconstruction and augmentation surgeries.

Secondary Surgeries After Oncoplastic Reduction Mammoplasty.

PURPOSE: The oncoplastic reduction approach is a popular option for women with breast cancer and macromastia. Although the benefits of this approach are numerous, data on the need for secondary surgeries are limited. We evaluated the need for all secondary surgeries after oncoplastic reduction in an attempt to understand the incidence and indications. METHODS: All patients with breast cancer who underwent an oncoplastic breast reduction at the time of the tumor resection were queried from a prospectively maintained database from 1998 to 2020 (n = 547) at a single institution. Secondary surgical procedures were defined as any unplanned return to the operating room. Demographic and clinical variables were analyzed, and secondary surgeries were classified and evaluated. The timing and rates of secondary surgery were evaluated and compared with clinical variables. RESULTS: There were 547 patients included in this series with a mean age of 55 years and body mass index of 33.5. Mean duration of follow-up was 3.8 years. One hundred and seventeen (21%) patients underwent 235 secondary surgeries, with an average of 1.4 operations until stable reconstruction was obtained. The reason for the secondary surgery was involved margins (7.5%), major complications (8.6%), aesthetic improvement (13.3%), and completion mastectomy (5.3%). Age 65 years and younger age was associated with any subsequent procedure (P = 0.023) and revision for cosmesis (P = 0.006). Patients with body mass index greater than 35 had increased secondary surgeries for operative complications (P = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Secondary surgeries after oncoplastic breast reduction procedures are common. Management of margins and complications, such as hematoma and infection, are early indications, with aesthetic improvement, wound healing complications, fat necrosis, and recurrence being late reasons. The most common reason for reoperation is aesthetic improvement, especially in younger patients. Attention to surgical technique and patient selection will help minimize secondary surgeries for the nononcological reasons.

The impact of axillary node surgery on outcomes following immediate breast reconstruction.

Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has become the most common method for postmastectomy reconstruction. Axillary lymph node dissection is performed for the staging of patients, but the impact of IBR with nodal surgery on postoperative complications remains elusive. The present study aims to investigate the impact of concomitant axillary lymph node surgery on postoperative complications. We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent IBR from 2000 to 2014. We recorded and analyzed patient data to determine the association between nodal surgery and postsurgical complications. Univariate and multivariate analyses were utilized to elucidate the risk of a complication given nodal surgery, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and type of incision for nodal access. A total of 986 breast reconstructions were included for analysis. Overall incidence of postoperative complications per breast that received nodal surgery was 35.9% (n = 230/642), compared to 25.6% (n = 88/344) in breasts that did not have concomitant nodal surgery (P = .001). Nodal surgery was found to increase risk of all complications with an odds ratio of 1.62 (P = .001). Moreover, complications were significantly higher in patients whose nodes were accessed via mastectomy incision (39.4%) when compared to a separate incision (33.5%). Multivariate analysis showed that nodal sampling through the mastectomy incision is a significant risk factor for seroma, with an odds ratio of 3.60 (P = .002). We did not observe differences in breast complications in patients who underwent SLNB vs ALND. These factors should be taken into account in the approach to breast reconstruction during lymphadenectomy.

The Biosynthetic Option as an Alternative in Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.

Synthetic mesh and acellular dermal matrix reinforcement during complex abdominal wall reconstruction (CAWR) have significantly improved outcomes. In an attempt to further improve outcomes, we combined both into a single biosynthetic by suturing a synthetic mesh on top of porcine acellular dermal matrix. Our aim was to review our experience with this new technique. Patients undergoing CAWR with the biosynthetic mesh were reviewed from a prospective database from 2015 to 2018. A total of 39 patients were 56.3 ± 10.9 years old, white (59.0%), and female (74.4%), with 31.9 ± 7.4 kg/m of body mass index. Eight repairs were performed on patients classified as greater than or equal to modified Ventral Hernia Working Group (mVHWG) class 3a, and 41.0% followed a concurrent resection of previously placed mesh. The biosynthetic mesh was placed as an underlay (51.3%) or inlay (46.2%) with primary closure in 51.3% and component separation in 12.8%. Recurrence at 3 years of follow-up occurred in 3 patients (7.7%). Complications within 60 days occurred in 6 patients (15.4%), including 4 soft tissue infections-one requiring explantation, with a total of 2 patients (5.1%) requiring explantation overall. Type 2 diabetes, previous mesh removal, component separation, and mVHWG class 3b independently predicted noninfectious complications. Male sex and mVHWG class 3b independently predicted surgical site infection. No predictors were found for recurrence. Biosynthetic mesh does not seem to increase the risk of early complications and may reduce recurrences and improve long-term outcomes after CAWR.

Survey Based Assessment of Burnout Rates Among US Plastic Surgery Residents.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the rates of burnout and contributory factors among US plastic surgery residents. METHODS: The Maslach Burnout Inventory Human Services Survey was emailed to program coordinators of American College of Graduate Medical Education-accredited plastic surgery residencies. Scores are provided for 3 subscales: emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP), and personal accomplishment. Normative scoring tables (low, average, high) were used for comparison. Residents were asked questions relating to their personal life (age, postgraduate year, marital status, and program characteristics). RESULTS: One hundred thirteen residents responded. The average age was 31.6 years (range, 25-43 years) and postgraduate year of 4.6 (range, 1-10). There were equal male and female respondents. Most were from integrated-only residencies (n = 59, 52.2%). On average, the majority reported working 50 to 80 hours per week (n = 93, 82.3%), spending the majority of time in tertiary referral centers (n = 107, 94.7%). Most received and took 3 weeks of vacation per year (n = 68, 60.7%). Furthermore, 65.5% met the definition of burnout by their scores from at least 1 subscale.The number of hours worked per week significantly correlated with increased scores in the EE and DP subscales. Residents who worked more than 80 hours per week had significantly higher scores in the EE and DP categories. Residents who had less than 2 weeks of vacation per year trended toward experiencing more EE (EE; 46.0, P = 0.077). The type of program (independent vs integrated), sex, having a significant other outside of the home, kids, and local family support did not significantly affect burnout scores for any subscales. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout exists among plastic surgery residents especially in the DP subscale. Working longer hours and less vacation correlates with increased rates of burnout among residents.

A Comparison of Acellular Dermal Matrices in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing literature of evidence that the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) in abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) for high-risk patients provides superior complication profiles when compared with standard synthetic mesh. Here we compare Fortiva, Strattice, and Alloderm ADMs in AWR. METHODS: In a prospectively maintained database, all patients undergoing AWR between January 2003 and November 2016 were reviewed. Hernia recurrence and surgical site occurrence (SSO) were our primary and secondary endpoints. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and logistic regression models were used to evaluate risks for hernia recurrence and SSO. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients underwent AWR with 1 of 3 ADMs. Median follow-up time was 20.9 months (1-60 months). Cumulative recurrence rates for each mesh were 6.9%, 11.2%, and 22.0% (P = 0.04), for Fortiva, Strattice, and Alloderm groups. Surgical site occurrence for each mesh was 56.9%, 49.0%, and 49.2%, respectively. Seroma was significantly lower in the Fortiva group (1.4%; P = 0.02). Independent risk factors hernia recurrence included body mass index of 30 kg/m(2) or higher and hypertension. Adjusted risk factors included oncologic resection for hernia recurrence (odds ratio, 5.3; confidence interval, 1.1-97.7; P = 0.11) and a wound class of contaminated or dirty/infected for SSO (odds ratio, 3.6; confidence interval, 1.0-16.6; P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Acellular dermal matrices provide a durable repair with low overall rate of recurrence and complications in AWR. The recurrence and complication profiles differ between brands. With proper patient selection and consideration, ADMs can be used confidently for a variety of indications and wound classifications.

Neoadjuvant Therapy Combined With Oncoplastic Reduction for High-Stage Breast Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Oncoplastic surgery has been shown to be a good alternative to breast conservation surgery (BCS) alone for patients with breast cancer. Its role in patients with advanced disease is unclear. In this study, we evaluate the safety of oncoplastic BCS (OBCS) in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy (NT) for high stage breast cancer. METHODS: The oncologic outcomes of consecutive patients classified as high stage (>T2 or at least N1) who received NT followed by BCS at EUH by a single breast surgeon (T.M.S.) from September 2004 until June 2015 were compared with those who received BCS combined with an oncoplastic reduction. Patients were surveyed using the BREAST-Q to determine their satisfaction after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 87 patients were included in this series. The mean initial tumor size (4.37 vs 2.56 cm), the weight of the surgical specimen, and the post-NT tumor size were all larger in the OBCS group as compared with BCS alone (1.54 vs 1.29 cm). The mean follow-up was 44 months. The average percent reduction in tumor size in response to NT was slightly greater in the OBCS group (61 vs 52%). Oncologic outcomes were similar for OBCS reduction and BCS groups, respectively: positive margin rate, reexcision rate, completion mastectomy rate, local recurrence rate, and 5-year DSS. Patient satisfaction was similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The oncoplastic approach in high stage patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic Powered by Editorial Manager and ProduXion Manager from Aries Systems Corporation therapy appears to be as safe and effective when compared to BCS alone. Oncoplastic BCS paired with NT broadens the indication for BCS for patients with larger tumor size.

The Psychosexual Impact of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The surgical management of breast cancer with mastectomy and breast reconstruction (BR) has been shown to increase the quality of life of cancer survivors. Yet the impact of surgery on sexuality, femininity, and condition of intimate relationships as a measure for sexual health has not been fully evaluated. METHODS: Ninety-six women who underwent mastectomy and immediate BR participated in the series. Surveys assessed patients' level of sexual health in the areas of femininity, sexual confidence during intimate relationships, and the role of breast sensibility in sexual satisfaction as compared with how they felt preoperatively. Surveys were scored on a 5-point Likert scale (5 = strongly agree). Inclusion criteria included longer than 1 year follow-up. RESULTS: After BR, the majority felt that their breasts were as important to self-confidence (86.3%), femininity (84.0%), and sexuality (61.5%) as they were preoperatively. Women older than 50 years were more likely to feel that their breasts were not a significant part of their femininity (26.7% vs 11.8%, P = 0.05). Women with a BMI greater than 30 were more likely to feel that their partner's view of their breasts did not affect their self-confidence (46.2% vs. 20.7%P = 0.027). Women with a BMI less than 30 (23.2% vs 4.0%, P = 0.05), and those who had a major complication (22.2% vs 0.00%, P = 0.08) were more likely to disagree that nipple aerolar complex reconstruction improved their sexual confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Most women agree that their sexuality, femininity, and intimate relationships are maintained after BR. Increasing age and BMI may lead to changes in sexual health postoperatively.

The Effect of BMI on Outcomes Following Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: The management of complex abdominal wall defects continues to be a challenging process secondary to the high potential for wound healing issues and ventral hernia recurrences. Body mass index (BMI) is a well-known risk factor when it comes to complications. We hypothesize that higher BMIs result in higher rates of postoperative complications in complex abdominal wall reconstructions (CAWRs). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent CAWR at Emory University Hospital over a 12-year period. Patients were divided into 4 cohorts based on BMI (15-24.9, 25-29.9, 30-34.9, and ≥35 kg/m). Complication rates among the 4 groups were evaluated as the primary outcome using Pearson χ analysis. Further analysis was done on specific complications including mesh exposure, skin necrosis, delayed healing, rate of fistula formation, seroma, hematoma, infection, rate of recurrence, and rate of reoperation. RESULTS: We included 313 patients with a mean follow-up of 15.6 months. The rate of overall complications demonstrated a nonsignificant increase with BMI of 15 to 24.9, 25 to 29.9, 30 to 34.9, and 35 kg/m or greater (31.7%, 35.0%, 47.6%, and 48.3%; P = 0.079, respectively). The rate of skin necrosis was significantly increased in the higher BMI groups (1.7%, 1.3%, 9.5%, and 13.5%; P = 0.004). The rate of ventral hernia recurrence was significantly increased in the higher BMI groups (8.3%, 12.5%, 29.8%, and 27.0%; P = 0.002). Rates of reoperation were also statistically increased in the higher BMI groups (25.0%, 22.5%, 41.7%, and 34.8%; P = 0.035). Rates of mesh exposure, delayed healing, fistula formation, seroma, hematoma, and infection were not statistically significant among the 4 BMI groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing CAWR with BMIs greater than 30 kg/m have significantly higher rates of skin necrosis, hernia recurrence, and reoperation compared with subgroups of lower BMI. Rates of overall complications among all BMI groups are similar, although trended up with BMI. Surgeons should weight the risks and benefits of CAWR in patients with higher BMIs to reduce specific postoperative complications.

The Psychosexual Impact of Partial and Total Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective One-Year Longitudinal Study.

BACKGROUND: This prospective trial sought to explore patients' satisfaction and expectations for surgery in the areas of sexuality and body image and to evaluate outcomes pertaining to sexual well-being after total and partial breast reconstruction (BR). METHODS: Patients who underwent mastectomy and immediate total BR (group 1; n = 60) or lumpectomy and reduction mammoplasty (group 2; n = 10) completed a questionnaire preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively to assess their satisfaction with their sex life and body image, perceptions of breasts as a source of sexuality, and expectations of surgery in these areas. Surveys were scored on a 5-point Likert scale, with 5 indicating strongly agree. Change scores were evaluated in the 2 groups (P = 0.05). RESULTS: In group 1, satisfaction with sex life and body image was unchanged. Pursuit of sexual attractiveness (from 3.78 to 3.31, P = 0.02) and an improved body image (from 3.89 to 3.33, P < 0.01) were cited as expectations for surgery but were achieved less often. When stratified by different types of reconstruction, there were no discernible differences in responses. In group 2, the patients reported an unexpected increase in their partner's perception of them as womanly (from 1.33 to 2.50, P = 0.01) and greater gains in the ability to wear sexually provocative clothing (from 1.78 to 3.11, P < 0.01).Preoperative expectations for improved body image were more often met in group 2 than group 1 (from 3.60 to 4.00 vs from 3.89 to 3.33, P = 0.02). Group 2 experienced greater improvement in body image satisfaction (from 2.80 to 3.80 vs from 3.37 to 3.44, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Overall satisfaction with sex life and body image was preserved for both groups; however, the oncoplastic approach achieved significantly larger gains in body image perception.

Patient-Reported Quality of Life After Breast Reconstruction: A One-Year Longitudinal Study Using the WHO-QOL Survey.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported quality of life (QOL) is an important measure of the impact that breast reconstruction has on postmastectomy patients. This study seeks to describe psychosocial outcomes after breast reconstruction and to identify factors that influence them. METHODS: All patients who underwent immediate postmastectomy reconstruction by the senior author between 2009 and 2011 were offered participation in this study. Patients completed the World Health Organization QOL-BREF questionnaire preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Change scores were compared across reconstructive techniques, as well as across various demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine women completed the preoperative questionnaire, and 60 patients completed the follow-up questionnaire at 1 year (response rate, 46.5%). Compared to the preoperative baseline, overall QOL was unchanged, general satisfaction with health improved significantly, and QOL in physical, psychological, social, and environmental domains decreased (P < 0.05 for all but social domains). On bivariate analysis, being in a relationship at the time of reconstruction was associated with a decline in overall QOL, as well as the quality of social relationships and environment. Educational level impacted how physical and psychological wellness evolved after surgery. Patients with a higher cancer stage reported a decrease in satisfaction with health at 1 year. Type of reconstruction, development of a complication, and need for additional surgery did not influence any of these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: At 1-year follow-up from postmastectomy reconstruction, breast cancer survivors report a similar overall QOL, but significant decrements in physical, psychological, and environmental QOL. Satisfaction with health improved. The type of breast reconstruction did not influence any of these outcomes.

The oncoplastic reduction approach to breast conservation therapy: benefits for margin control.

BACKGROUND: Reduction mammaplasty during lumpectomy allows more generous resection and minimizes potential for poor cosmesis as compared with breast conservation therapy alone. OBJECTIVES: The authors assessed the benefits of oncoplastic reduction for margin status in patients with breast cancer by conducting a retrospective review of cases of tumor resection alone vs tumor resection with oncoplastic reduction. METHODS: Patients with breast cancer who underwent lumpectomy performed by a single oncologic surgeon between 2009 and 2013 were included. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on surgical procedure: tumor resection with oncoplastic reduction (group 1) vs tumor resection alone (group 2). Patient demographics including risk factors, diagnosis, cancer stage, and procedure type were recorded. Tumor size, specimen weight, width of narrowest margin, and receptor status were determined. Outcome variables included margin positivity (≤1 mm), need for re-excision, and conversion to completion mastectomy. RESULTS: A total of 222 breasts from 207 patients were included in the study: 83 in group 1 and 139 in group 2. The patients in group 1 had a lower incidence of positive margins and wider free surgical margins, required re-excision less often, and went on to completion mastectomy less often. Patients in group 1 were younger and had cancer that was more advanced. When controlling for these variables on multivariate regression analysis, the oncoplastic technique was independently associated with fewer positive margins and fewer instances of re-excision. CONCLUSIONS: The oncoplastic reduction technique achieves wider free margins and less often necessitates re-excision or subsequent mastectomy. The long-term oncologic effect of this approach deserves further study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: Report of 2 Cases and Review of the Literature.

Although primary breast lymphomas are exceedingly rare, cases of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (iALCL) continue to be reported. The authors describe their experience with 2 patients and review the literature. Both patients presented with periprosthetic fluid collection. Neither had evidence of systemic disease nor received systemic therapy. Both were disease free after bilateral capsulectomies and implant removal without implant replacement, and disease did not recur. During the literature review, 63 cases of iALCL (including our 2 patients) were identified. The median time from implant placement to diagnosis was 9 years. Both saline and silicone implants were associated with iALCL. Of the 26 cases for which implant surface was reported, the surface was textured in 24. Of the 58 patients with an identifiable presentation, 39 had periprosthetic fluid collection, including 7 with an associated mass; 13 had an isolated mass at presentation, including 1 with axillary adenopathy. Forty patients had capsulectomy, 7 of whom underwent implant replacement. Of the 44 patients with known treatment, 33 received chemotherapy and 23 received radiation. Of the 49 patients with known anaplastic large cell lymphoma, 15 had disease recurrence, and 4 patient deaths were reported. Of the 18 patients presenting with a mass, 11 had disease recurrence, including all 4 patients who died. This study represents the largest review of patients with iALCL described to date. Although most cases have an indolent clinical course, the variety of presentations defined as "seroma" vs "capsular involvement" emphasizes the importance of investigating a definitive method of diagnosis, management, and treatment of this disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5.

Preventing Infection in Implant-based Breast Reconstruction: Evaluating the Evidence for Common Practices and Standardized Protocols.

Infection following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) results in increased rates of hospital readmission, reoperation, patient and hospital expenses, and reconstructive failure. IBBR is a complex, multistep procedure, and there is a relative lack of high-quality plastic surgery evidence regarding "best practices" in the prevention of implant infections. In the absence of strong data, standardizing procedures based on available evidence can reduce error and improve efficacy and outcomes. Methods: We performed a focused literature review of the available evidence supporting specific interventions for infection prevention in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of care that are applicable to IBBR. In addition, we examined previously published standardized perioperative protocols for implant reconstruction. Results: Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative planning and organization is crucial in IBBR. Preoperative planning involves skin decolonization in advance of surgery with either chlorhexidine gluconate or mupirocin. Intraoperative methods that have shown potential benefit include double-gloving, breast pocket irrigation, separate closing instruments, and the utilization of "no-touch" techniques. In the postoperative period, the duration of drain removal and postoperative antibiotic administration play an important role in the prevention of surgical site infection. Conclusions: There is a crucial need to establish an evidence-based set of "best practices" for IBBR, and there exists a paucity of evidence in the breast literature. These data can be utilized to develop a standardized protocol as part of a rigorous quality improvement methodology.

Drain Removal Time in Pre-pectoral versus Dual Plane Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction following Nipple-sparing Mastectomy.

Pre-pectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has become a popular approach compared with the dual plane technique. Our objective was to determine if there was a difference in time to postoperative breast drain removal in direct-to-implant or tissue expander reconstruction following NSM when comparing pre-pectoral with dual plane technique. Methods: A total of 200 patients (335 breasts) received NSM followed by implant or expander reconstruction at our institution between the years 2009 and 2020. Direct-to-implant reconstruction had 113 pre-pectoral versus 67 dual plane, and tissue expander reconstruction had six pre-pectoral versus 149 dual plane. Our analysis included age at mastectomy, body mass index, history of preoperative breast radiation, and smoking history. Case complications included seroma or hematoma, breast or axillary infection requiring antibiotics or operative washout, device replacement due to extrusion or infection, skin necrosis, and capsular contracture. Statistical analysis was completed with Pearson chi-square test, Fisher exact test, and the two-sample T-test using IBM SPSS Statistics 24.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y.). Results: The average time until breast drain removal in dual plane implant patients was significantly less than in pre-pectoral implant patients (9.42 versus 14.01 days). The average time until breast drain removal in dual plane expander patients was significantly less than in pre-pectoral expander patients (11.47 versus 20.30 days). Conclusion: In both implant and expander reconstruction following NSM, patients receiving dual plane device placement had a shorter postoperative time until breast drain removal when compared with patients receiving pre-pectoral device placement.

The Impact Oncoplastic Reduction Has on Long-Term Recurrence in Breast Conservation Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The use of oncoplastic reduction techniques have many proven benefits over lumpectomy alone in the management of women with breast cancer. The impact it has on tumor recurrence is unclear. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the incidence of recurrence in patients who underwent oncoplastic reduction techniques compared to lumpectomy alone. METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of patients at Emory Hospital who underwent oncoplastic reduction techniques at the time of tumor resection was queried. These patients were compared to a series of patients who had lumpectomy alone over a similar period. For inclusion in the study, patients were at least 10 years since the time of the tumor resection. The main outcome of interest was tumor recurrence. RESULTS: There were 97 patients in the lumpectomy-only group and 95 patients in the oncoplastic reduction group, with an average follow-up of 7.8 years and 8.5 years, respectively. Patients in the oncoplastic group were younger (lumpectomy only, 61.4 years; oncoplastic reduction, 51.6 years; p < 0.001) and had larger tumors (lumpectomy only, 1.1 cm; oncoplastic reduction, 1.6 cm; p < 0.001). Local recurrence was 13 percent in the lumpectomy-only group and 9 percent in the oncoplastic reduction group (p = 0.34), and overall recurrence rates were similar (lumpectomy only, 15 percent; oncoplastic reduction, 24 percent; p = 0.13). Overall, surgical intervention (lumpectomy alone versus oncoplastic reduction) was not associated with local recurrence or any recurrence on univariate and multivariate analyses. CONCLUSION: Despite the oncoplastic reduction patients having a higher risk of recurrence and a more generous tumor resection, the long-term recurrence rates were equivalent when compared to breast-conserving therapy alone. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

The Incidence of Occult Malignant and High-Risk Pathologic Findings in Breast Reduction Specimens.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to determine the incidence of occult malignancy and high-risk breast pathologic findings in patients who undergo breast reduction procedures. METHODS: Medical records of consecutive patients who underwent reduction mammaplasty performed by the senior authors (A.L. and G.W.C.) at Emory University Hospital between 1997 and 2018 were reviewed. Data regarding patient demographics, personal or family history of malignancy, operative technique, pathologic findings, and follow-up were extracted. Patients were categorized into two groups, those with and those without breast cancer. Group A patients underwent reduction for symptomatic macromastia, and group B underwent contralateral reduction for unilateral breast cancer treated with oncoplastic partial or total breast cancer reconstruction. Pathologic findings were divided into four groups; normal, benign, high-risk, and malignant. RESULTS: A total 1014 patients (1419 breast reductions) were included in the study. Comparing groups A and B, mean age was 37.8 ± 16.2 years versus 54.5 ± 11.1 years (p < 0.001), mean body mass index was 34.1 ± 7.6 kg/m2 versus 33.3 ± 7.4 kg/m2 (p = 0.2), and average reduction weight was 875.6 ± 491 g versus 723.7 ± 438 g (p < 0.001). The incidence of high-risk or malignant lesions was 1.8 percent (n = 15) in group A and 8 percent (n = 49) in group B (p < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, age and personal history of breast cancer were positive predictors for high-risk and malignant lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of abnormal pathologic findings in breast reduction specimens is not uncommon, and occult malignancy or high-risk lesions can be found, especially in patients with contralateral breast cancer. Appropriate specimen orientation, diligence with checking the pathologic findings, and open communication with the pathologist are crucial. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.

Surgical Outcomes in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral breast reconstruction has reemerged as a popular option for prosthetic-based breast reconstruction. Recent published literature highlights good outcomes; however, techniques are evolving and options exist for different technologies. The aim of this study is to evaluate short-term complication rates of prepectoral reconstructions using Cortiva acellular dermal matrix. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was conducted of all patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate direct-to-implant or 2-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction with Cortiva (RTI Surgical, Alachua, Fla.) between January 2016 and September 2018. The incidence of surgical complications was determined and studied against patient demographics and procedural details. RESULTS: One-hundred eighteen patients met the inclusion criteria for a total of 183 individual breasts reconstructed with prepectoral implant. Average length of follow-up was 9.26 months (range, 1.0 month to 2.5 years). Thirty-two breasts (17.49%) experienced 1 or more complications. Prepectoral reconstruction was successful 89.07% of the time. Infection was the most common cause of both reoperation and implant failure, with 7.65% of all breasts requiring washout and 5.46% failing prosthetic reconstruction secondary to infection. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical outcomes for prepectoral breast reconstruction using 2-stage and direct-to-implant are similar and comparable to the literature for dual-plane reconstruction, with infection being the main cause of failure.

Opioid Use following Outpatient Breast Surgery: Are Physicians Part of the Problem?

BACKGROUND: The increasing rate of opioid abuse warrants standardization of postoperative pain management. The purpose of this study was to analyze the use of opioids in pain control and patient satisfaction following ambulatory breast surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective study of a consecutive series of patients undergoing secondary breast reconstruction (n = 60) or breast reduction (n = 35). All patients were given a pain questionnaire preoperatively. Postoperatively, women received 30 tablets of oxycodone 5.0 mg/acetaminophen 325 mg. Patients were contacted three times: postoperative days 3 to 5, 8 to 10, and 30 or higher. All patients were queried on narcotic use, pain level (0 to 10), and satisfaction with pain control. Patients with allergies or taking narcotics preoperatively were excluded. RESULTS: Most in the secondary breast reconstruction group (61.5 percent) had stopped taking opioids by postoperative day 5. Patients consumed a mean of 11.4 tablets following secondary breast reconstruction and a mean of 17.5 tablets after breast reduction. A majority reported feeling satisfied with their pain management. At postoperative day greater than 30, most experienced very mild pain, with an improvement of 3.74 points following breast reduction. There were 18.6 and 12.5 tablets per patient left over for secondary breast reconstruction and breast reduction, respectively. A total of 1551 unused tablets were left over for the entire cohort at postoperative day greater than 30. There was no significant difference in average pain scores or interference with enjoyment or activity between those who did or did not take pain medication. CONCLUSIONS: This commonly prescribed pain regimen provides adequate pain relief and satisfaction for breast surgery, with a substantial number of leftover tablets. Physicians as prescribers should be aware of discrepancies. Prescription of 30 opioid tablets after outpatient breast surgery appears unnecessary and excessive. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

The Expanded Use of Autoaugmentation Techniques in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Autoaugmentation techniques have been applied to oncoplastic reductions to assist with filling larger, more remote defects, and to women with smaller breasts. The purpose of this report is to describe the use of autoaugmentation techniques in oncoplastic reduction and compare the results with those of traditional oncoplastic reduction. METHODS: The authors queried a prospectively maintained database of all women who underwent partial mastectomy and oncoplastic reduction between 1994 and October of 2015. The autoaugmentation techniques were defined as (1) extended primary nipple autoaugmentation pedicle, and (2) primary nipple pedicle and secondary autoaugmentation pedicle. Comparisons were made to a control oncoplastic group. RESULTS: There were a total of 333 patients, 222 patients (67.7 percent) without autoaugmentation and 111 patients (33 percent) with autoaugmentation (51 patients with an extended autoaugmentation pedicle, and 60 patients with a secondary autoaugmentation pedicle). Biopsy weight was smallest in the extended pedicle group (136 g) and largest in the regular oncoplastic group (235 g; p = 0.017). Superomedial was the most common extended pedicle, and lateral was the most common location. Inferolateral was the most common secondary pedicle for lateral and upper outer defects. There were no significant differences in the overall complication rate: 15.5 percent in the regular oncoplastic group, 19.6 percent in the extended pedicle group, and 20 percent in the secondary pedicle group. CONCLUSIONS: Autoaugmentation techniques have evolved to manage complex defects not amenable to standard oncoplastic reduction methods. They are often required for lateral defects, especially in smaller breasts. Autoaugmentation can be performed safely without an increased risk of complications, broadening the indications for breast conservation therapy. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.