Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Step 1 will transition to a pass/fail system in 2022. This study aimed to characterize the effects of this change on integrated plastic surgery program directors' selection criteria and assess whether Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) can replace Step 1 as an application selection metric. DESIGN/METHODS:Online survey that was administered to a collaborative group of ten plastic surgery program directors collecting USMLE Step 1, Step 2 CK, In-Service, and written board scores for 3 years of graduated integrated residents. SETTING/METHODS:Ten academic integrated plastic surgery programs. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Data from 80 graduated integrated plastic surgery residents. RESULTS:Across 80 included integrated residents, mean (SD) Step 1 score was 247 (13), Step 2 CK was 249 (13), PGY1-6 In-Service percentiles varied from 45 to 53 percentile, and written board pass rate was 98.3%. Both Step 1 and Step 2 CK correlated highly with In-Service percentiles (both p < 0.001), with Step 2 CK scores correlating similarly with In-Service performance compared to Step 1 (rho 0.359 vs. 0.355, respectively). Across applicant characteristics, program directors reported the highest relative increase in Step 2 CK importance after Step 1 transitions to pass/fail. CONCLUSIONS:Step 2 CK correlates similarly with plastic surgery In-Service performance compared to Step 1. While Step scores do not necessarily correlate with residency performance, Step 2 CK may also be used as an application screening metric for programs seeking objective data to differentiate plastic surgery applicants.

BACKGROUND:Incision planning is a critical factor in nipple-sparing mastectomy outcomes. Evidence on optimal incision patterns in patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate microvascular breast reconstruction is lacking in the literature. METHODS:A single-institution retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate microvascular autologous reconstruction from 2007 to 2019. Outcomes-including major mastectomy flap necrosis, full nipple-areola complex necrosis, and any major ischemic complication of the skin envelope-were compared among incision types. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with major ischemic complication. RESULTS:Two hundred seventy-nine reconstructions (163 patients) were identified, primarily using internal mammary recipient vessels (98.9 percent). Vertical incisions were used in 139 cases; inframammary, in 53; lateral radial, in 51; and inverted-T, in 35. Thirty-two cases (11.5 percent) had major mastectomy flap necrosis, 11 (3.9 percent) had full nipple-areola complex necrosis, and 38 (13.6 percent) had any major ischemic complication. Inframammary incisions had higher rates of major ischemic complication (25 percent) than vertical (5.8 percent; p < 0.001) and lateral radial (7.8 percent; p = 0.032) incisions. Inverted-T incisions also had higher rates of major ischemic complication (36.1 percent) than both vertical (p < 0.001) and lateral radial (p = 0.002) incisions. Inframammary incisions (OR, 4.382; p = 0.002), inverted-T incisions (OR, 3.952; p = 0.011), and mastectomy weight (OR, 1.003; p < 0.001) were independently associated with an increased risk of major ischemic complication. Inframammary incisions with major ischemic complication demonstrated significantly higher body mass index, mastectomy weight, and flap weight compared to those without. CONCLUSIONS:Inframammary and inverted-T incisions are associated with a higher risk of major ischemic skin envelope complications after nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate microvascular breast reconstruction. Radial incisions can be considered to optimize recipient vessel exposure without compromising perfusion. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic, III.

BACKGROUND: Stacked and conjoined (SC) flaps are a useful means of increasing flap volume in autologous breast reconstruction. The majority of studies, however, have been limited to smaller, single-center series. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to identify outcomes-based studies on microvascular SC-flap breast reconstruction. Pooled rates of flap and operative characteristics were analyzed. Meta-analytic effect size estimates were calculated for reconstructive complication rates and outcomes of studies comparing SC flaps to non-SC flaps. Meta-regression analysis identified risk factors for flap complications. RESULTS: = 0.00%), though rates of any flap and donor-site complication were similar. Age, body mass index, flap weight, and flap donor site and recipient vessels were not associated with increased risk of any flap complication. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: A global appraisal of the current evidence demonstrated the safety of SC-flap breast reconstruction with low complication rates, regardless of donor site, and lower rates of fat necrosis compared with non-SC flaps.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The majority of two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction has been described utilizing acellular dermal matrix (ADM). Although reports of prepectoral breast reconstruction without ADM exist, there is a paucity of comparative studies. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A single-institution retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients undergoing immediate prepectoral two-stage breast reconstruction with tissue expanders from 2017 to 2019. Short-term reconstructive and aesthetic complications were compared between cases that utilized ADM for support and those that did not. Results/UNASSIGNED:0.362). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Immediate two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction with tissue expanders has comparable rates of short-term complications with or without ADM support. Safety of prepectoral expander placement without ADM may warrant more selective ADM use in these cases.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Dangling protocols are known to vary by surgeon and center, and their specific regimen is often largely based on single surgeon or institutional experience. A systematic review was conducted to derive evidence-based recommendations for dangling protocols according to patient-specific and flap-specific considerations. METHODS:A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Embase-OVID and Cochrane-CENTRAL. Study design, patient and flap characteristics, protocol details, dangling-related complications, and flap success rate were recorded. Studies were graded using the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence Scale. Data heterogeneity precluded quantitative analysis. RESULTS:Eleven articles were included (level of evidence (range):IIb-IV; N (range):8-150; age (range):6-89). Dangling initiation, time, and frequency varied considerably. Flap success rate ranged from 94 to 100%. Active smoking, diabetes, and hypertension are associated with characteristic physiologic changes that require vigilance and potential protocol modification. Early dangling appears to be safe across a variety of free flap locations, sizes, and indications. Axial fasciocutaneous flaps may tolerate more aggressive protocols than muscular flaps. While flaps with single venous anastomosis tolerate dangling, double venous or flow-through anastomoses may provide additional benefit. Major limitations included small sample sizes, uncontrolled study designs, and heterogeneous patient selection, dangling practices, monitoring methods, and outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS:Significant heterogeneity persists in postoperative dangling protocols after lower extremity microvascular reconstruction. Patient comorbidities and flap characteristics appear to affect tolerance to dangling. We propose two different standardized pathways based on risk factors. Clinical vigilance should be exercised in tailoring lower extremity protocols to patients' individual characteristics and postoperative course.

BACKGROUND:Stacked and conjoined free flaps are increasingly utilized in autologous breast reconstruction to augment tissue transfer volume. However, there is a paucity of comparative data on abdominally-based stacked/conjoined versus non-stacked/conjoined flaps. The purpose of this study was to compare ability to match native breast size, complications, recovery, and symmetrizing procedures between these two cohorts in unilateral breast reconstruction. METHODS:A retrospective review of all stacked (two separate hemiabdominal)/conjoined (bipedicled full abdominal) flaps and non-stacked/conjoined (unipedicled hemiabdominal) flaps in unilateral abdominally-based autologous breast reconstructions was performed from 2011 to 2018. Variables including demographics, operative characteristics, complications, and revisions were compared in 36 stacked/conjoined patients versus 146 non-stacked/conjoined patients. RESULTS:The stacked/conjoined cohort had more DIEP flaps (91.7 vs. 65.1%) and the non-stacked/conjoined group more MS-TRAMs (34.2 vs. 6.9%, p = .000). Additionally, non-stacked/conjoined flaps had greater utilization of combined medial and lateral row perforators (p = .000). Mean flap weight was significantly higher than mastectomy weight in stacked/conjoined flaps (+110.7 g) when compared to non-stacked/conjoined flaps (-40.2) (p = .023). Average follow-up was 54.7 ± 27.5 and 54.6 ± 29.3 months, respectively. Stacked/conjoined flaps had lower fat necrosis rates (8.3 vs. 25.4%, p = .039) and had a decreased risk of fat necrosis on multivariable regression analysis (OR 0.278, p = 0.045). There were otherwise no differences in flap, breast, or donor-site complications. Stacked/conjoined flaps also had a lower rate of contralateral breast reduction (p = .041). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Stacked/conjoined flaps were associated with a lower risk of fat necrosis compared with non-stacked/conjoined flaps and had a lower rate of contralateral symmetrizing reductions in patients undergoing unilateral abdominally-based breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Given the relatively small size of thigh-based flaps and the possible necessity for a multiflap reconstruction, it is imperative to arrive at an accurate estimation of flap weight during preoperative planning. It was our objective to develop a novel technique for the preoperative estimation of profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap weight. METHODS: All patients that underwent transverse PAP flap breast reconstruction at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed. Subcutaneous tissue thicknesses were measured on axial computed tomography angiography scans at several predetermined points. The distance from the inferior gluteal crease to the PAP was also recorded. Linear regression was used to estimate flap weight. RESULTS:has a value of 1 if the patient was scanned in the supine position or 0 if prone. The aforementioned formula yielded a median estimated flap weight of 305 g (IQR: 234-402) and a median percent error of 10.5% (IQR: 6.1-16.2). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: The authors demonstrate a simple and accurate formula for the preoperative estimation of transverse PAP flap weight for breast reconstruction.