Faculty Bibliography
Searched for:
in-biosketch:true
person:choim01
Total Results:
135
Nipple-Areola Complex Malposition in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Review of Risk Factors and Corrective Techniques from Greater Than 1000 Reconstructions
BACKGROUND: Nipple-areola complex (NAC) malposition after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) can be a challenging issue to correct. The current literature is largely limited to smaller series and implant-based reconstructions. METHODS: A retrospective review of all NSMs from 2006 to 2016 at a single institution was performed. Incidence, risk factors and corrective techniques of NAC malposition were analyzed. RESULTS: 1037 cases of NSM were identified, of which 77 (7.4%) underwent NAC repositioning. All were performed in a delayed fashion. The most common techniques included crescentic periareolar excision (25; 32.5%) and directional skin excision (10; 13.0%).Cases requiring NAC repositioning were significantly more likely to have preoperative radiation (p=0.0008), a vertical or Wise pattern incision (p=0.0157), autologous reconstruction (p=0.0219), and minor mastectomy flap necrosis (p=0.0462) (Table 1). Previous radiation (OR=3.6827, p=0.0028), vertical radial mastectomy incisions (OR=1.8218, p=0.0202), and autologous reconstruction (OR=1.77, p=0.0053) were positive independent predictors of NAC repositioning, whereas implant-based reconstruction (OR=0.5552, p<0.0001) was a negative independent predictor of repositioning. BMI (p=0.7104) and adjuvant radiation (p=0.9536), among other variables, were not predictors of NAC repositioning. CONCLUSIONS: NAC malposition after NSM can be successfully corrected with various techniques. Previous radiation, vertical mastectomy incisions, and autologous reconstruction are independently predictive of NAC malposition.
PMID: 28369015
ISSN: 1529-4242
CID: 2521342
Does the Timing of Chemotherapy Affect Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction Complications?
INTRODUCTION: In this study we evaluated how the timing of chemotherapy for breast cancer affects post-reconstruction complications to determine whether there is an optimal time for breast reconstruction after chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review identified 344 breast cancer patients who underwent chemotherapy with mastectomy and autologous/prosthetic reconstruction from 2011 to 2014. A control group of 127 breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomy and autologous/prosthetic reconstruction without chemotherapy was also identified from the same period. The 2 groups were compared and analyzed for differences in demographic characteristics, treatment, and postoperative complication rates. The chemotherapy group was subsequently stratified into 3 subgroups on the basis of the number of days between chemotherapy treatment and reconstructive surgery ( 60 days) for further analysis. RESULTS: Patients who received chemotherapy were followed for an average of 803.4 days (26.4 months) from the time of initial reconstruction (mean time to complication, 43.3 +/- 82.7 days), and experienced an overall greater complication rate compared with control subjects (32.8% vs. 24.4%; P = .078). When complications were divided into minor, major, and reconstructive failure categories, analysis revealed that the chemotherapy group experienced more minor complications than the control group (18% vs. 11%; P = .067). However, there were no statistically significant differences in major complication rates (10.5% vs. 9.4%) and reconstructive failure complication rates (3.8% vs. 2.4%) between the chemotherapy group and control group. Sixty-eight patients (19.8%) underwent surgery within 30 days of chemotherapy, 210 patients (61%) within 30 to 60 days, and 66 patients (19.2%) after 60 days. Of note, patients in the 60 days), time to complication, complication severity, or complication type. Whereas patients who underwent surgery 30 to 60 days from the time of chemotherapy had lower rates of skin necrosis (3.8%) and infection (15.7%) compared with the
PMID: 28336245
ISSN: 1938-0666
CID: 2499612
The Impact of Two Operating Surgeons on Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction
BACKGROUND: Given the complexity of microsurgical breast reconstruction, there are many opportunities to improve both surgical efficiency and outcomes. The use of two operating surgeons has been employed, but the outcomes are unproven. In this study, the authors compare the outcomes of patients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction with one operating surgeon to those with two surgeons. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction between July of 2011 and January of 2014 at a single academic institution was conducted. Patients were divided into two cohorts: those undergoing reconstruction with one surgeon and those having reconstruction with two surgeons. Once identified, patients were analyzed and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients underwent 248 microsurgical breast reconstructions during the study period. One hundred three patients (170 flaps) had two surgeons and 54 patients (78 flaps) had one surgeon. Patients undergoing unilateral and bilateral reconstructions with two surgeons had decreased mean operating room time by 60.1 minutes and 134 minutes (p < 0.001) and length of stay by 1.8 days and 1.3 days (p < 0.05), when compared to a single surgeon. Additionally, patients with one surgeon were more likely to have postoperative donor-site breakdown at 5.1 percent (n = 4) versus 0.6 percent (n = 1) (p = 0.0351). CONCLUSIONS: The use of two operating surgeons has demonstrable effects on the outcomes of microsurgical breast reconstruction. The addition of a second surgeon significantly decreases operating room time and shortens hospital length of stay in both unilateral and bilateral reconstruction. It also significantly decreases donor-site wound healing complications. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
PMID: 28121853
ISSN: 1529-4242
CID: 2418512
Does Smoking History Confer a Higher Risk for Reconstructive Complications in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy?
History of smoking has been implicated as a risk factor for reconstructive complications in nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), however there have been no direct analyses of outcomes in smokers and nonsmokers. All patients undergoing NSM at New York University Langone Medical Center from 2006 to 2014 were identified. Outcomes were compared for those with and without a smoking history and stratified by pack-year smoking history and years-to-quitting (YTQ). A total of 543 nipple-sparing mastectomies were performed from 2006 to 2014 with a total of 49 in patients with a history of smoking. Reconstructive outcomes in NSM between those with and without a smoking history were equivalent. Those with a smoking history were not significantly more likely to have mastectomy flap necrosis (p = 0.6251), partial (p = 0.8564), or complete (p = 0.3365) nipple-areola complex (NAC) necrosis. Likewise, active smokers alone did not have a higher risk of complications compared to nonsmokers or those with smoking history. Comparing nonsmokers and those with a less or greater than 10 pack-year smoking history, those with a > 10 pack-year history had significantly more complete NAC necrosis (p = 0.0114, <0.0001). Those with <5 YTQ prior to NSM trended toward an increased rate of complete NAC necrosis (p = 0.0752). Outcomes for those with a < 10 pack-year smoking history or >5 YTQ prior to NSM were equivalent to those without a smoking history. We demonstrate that NSM may be safely offered to those with a smoking history although a > 10 pack-year smoking history or <5 YTQ prior to NSM may impart a higher risk of reconstructive complications, including complete NAC necrosis.
PMID: 28097778
ISSN: 1524-4741
CID: 2413902
The Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Compared to Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Healing after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is the latest advancement in the treatment of breast cancer. The authors aimed to investigate the effects of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in nipple-sparing mastectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy from 2006 to June of 2015 were identified. Results were stratified by presence of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 840 nipple-sparing mastectomies were performed. Twenty-eight were in those who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 93 were in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients receiving both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the neoadjuvant group. Nipple-sparing mastectomies that received neoadjuvant (with or without adjuvant) chemotherapy were compared to those in patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy. Those with neoadjuvant (with or without adjuvant) chemotherapy were more likely to have explantation (p = 0.0239) and complete nipple-areola complex necrosis (p = 0.0021). Those with neoadjuvant (with or without adjuvant) chemotherapy were more likely to have implant explantation (p = 0.0015) and complete nipple-areola complex necrosis (p = 0.0004) compared to those with no chemotherapy. Compared to nipple-sparing mastectomies in patients with no chemotherapy, those with adjuvant chemotherapy were more likely to have a hematoma (p = 0.0021). Those that received both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy were more likely to have complete nipple-areola complex necrosis compared with both the neoadjuvant chemotherapy-only and adjuvant chemotherapy-only groups (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is safe to perform in the setting of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy. As a whole, neoadjuvant (with or without adjuvant) chemotherapy increases risk of complications. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
PMID: 28027222
ISSN: 1529-4242
CID: 2383272
Analysis of Flap Weight and Postoperative Complications Based on Flap Weight in Patients Undergoing Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction
Background Higher body mass index (BMI) has been shown to increase postoperative complications in autologous breast reconstruction. However, the correlation with flap weight is unknown. Here, we explore the relationship of flap weights and complication rates in patients undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction. Methods Retrospective chart review identified all patients undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction with abdominally based flaps at a single institution between November 2007 and April 2013. Breasts with documented flap weight and 1-year follow-up were included. Patients undergoing stacked deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps were excluded. Breasts were divided into quartiles based on flap weight and examined by demographics, surgical characteristics, complications, and revisions. Results A total of 130 patients undergoing 225 flaps were identified. Patients had a mean age of 50.4 years, mean BMI of 27.1 kg/m2, and mean flap weight of 638.4 g (range: 70-1640 g). Flap weight and BMI were directly correlated. Flaps were divided into weight-based quartiles: first (70-396 g), second (397-615 g), third (616-870 g), and fourth (871-1640 g). There were no associations between flap weight and incidences of venous thrombosis, arterial thrombosis, hematoma, flap loss, fat necrosis, or donor site hernia. However, increased flap weight was associated with increased rate of donor site wound healing problems in both univariate and multivariate analysis. Conclusions Increased flap weight is not associated with added flap complications among patients undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction, however, patients with flaps of 667.5 g or more are more likely to have donor site healing problems. The success and evidence contrary to previous studies may be attributed to surgeon intraoperative flap choice.
PMID: 27919113
ISSN: 1098-8947
CID: 2354242
Subcutaneous Implant-based Breast Reconstruction with Acellular Dermal Matrix/Mesh: A Systematic Review
BACKGROUND: The availability of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and synthetic mesh products has prompted plastic surgeons to revisit subcutaneous implant-based breast reconstruction. The literature is limited, however, with regards to evidence on patient selection, techniques, and outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review of the Medline and Cochrane databases was performed for original studies reporting breast reconstruction with ADM or mesh, and subcutaneous implant placement. Studies were analyzed for level of evidence, inclusion/exclusion criteria for subcutaneous reconstruction, reconstruction characteristics, and outcomes. RESULTS: Six studies (186 reconstructions) were identified for review. The majority of studies (66.7%) were level IV evidence case series. Eighty percent of studies had contraindications for subcutaneous reconstruction, most commonly preoperative radiation, high body mass index, and active smoking. Forty percent of studies commenting on patient selection assessed mastectomy flap perfusion for subcutaneous reconstruction. Forty-five percent of reconstructions were direct-to-implant, 33.3% 2-stage, and 21.5% single-stage adjustable implant, with ADM utilized in 60.2% of reconstructions versus mesh. Pooled complication rates included: major infection 1.2%, seroma 2.9%, hematoma 2.3%, full nipple-areola complex necrosis 1.1%, partial nipple-areola complex necrosis 4.5%, major flap necrosis 1.8%, wound healing complication 2.3%, explantation 4.1%, and grade III/IV capsular contracture 1.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled short-term complication rates in subcutaneous alloplastic breast reconstruction with ADM or mesh are low in preliminary studies with selective patient populations, though techniques and outcomes are variable across studies. Larger comparative studies and better-defined selection criteria and outcomes reporting are needed to develop appropriate indications for performing subcutaneous implant-based reconstruction.
PMCID:5142500
PMID: 27975034
ISSN: 2169-7574
CID: 2363572
"Breast in a Day": Examining Single-Stage Immediate, Permanent Implant Reconstruction in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate, permanent implant reconstruction offers patients a prosthetic "breast in a day" compared to tissue expander techniques requiring multiple procedures. METHODS: Patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate, permanent implant reconstruction were reviewed with patient demographics and outcomes analyzed. RESULTS: Of 842 nipple-sparing mastectomies from 2006 to June of 2015, 160 (19.0 percent) underwent immediate, permanent implant reconstruction. The average age and body mass index were 46.5 years and 23.3 kg/m. The majority of implants were either Allergan Style 20 (48.1 percent) or Style 15 (22.5 percent). The average implant size was 376.2 ml, and 91.3 percent of reconstructions used acellular dermal matrix. The average number of reconstructive operations was 1.3. Follow-up was 21.9 months. The most common major complication was major mastectomy flap necrosis (8.1 percent). The rate of reconstructive failure was 5.6 percent and implant loss was 4.4 percent. The most common minor complication was minor mastectomy flap necrosis (14.4 percent). The rates of full-thickness and partial-thickness nipple necrosis were 4.4 and 7.5 percent, respectively. Age older than 50 years (p = 0.0276) and implant size greater than 400 ml (p = 0.0467) emerged as independent predictors of overall complications. Obesity (p = 0.4073), tobacco use (p = 0.2749), prior radiation therapy (p = 0.4613), and acellular dermal matrix (p = 0.5305) were not associated with greater complication rates. CONCLUSION: Immediate, permanent implant reconstruction in nipple-sparing mastectomy provides patients with a breast in a day in less than two procedures, with a low complication rate. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
PMID: 27465178
ISSN: 1529-4242
CID: 2191202
To Resect or Not to Resect: The Effects of Rib-Sparing Harvest of the Internal Mammary Vessels in Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction
Background The internal mammary vessels are the most commonly used recipients for microsurgical breast reconstructions. Often, the costal cartilage is sacrificed to obtain improved vessel exposure. In an effort to reduce adverse effects associated with traditional rib sacrifice, recent studies have described less-invasive, rib-sparing strategies. Methods After obtaining institutional review board's approval, a retrospective review of all patients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction at a single institution between November 2007 and December 2013 was conducted. Patients were divided into two cohorts for comparison: rib-sacrificing and rib-sparing internal mammary vessel harvests. Results A total of 547 reconstructions (344 patients) met inclusion criteria for this study. A total of 64.9% (n = 355) underwent rib-sacrificing internal mammary vessel harvest. Cohorts were similar in baseline patient characteristics, indications for surgery, and cancer therapies. However, patients undergoing rib-sparing reconstructions had significantly shorter operative times (440 vs. 476 minutes; p < 0.01), and significantly less postoperative pain on postoperative day (POD) 1 (2.8/10 vs. 3.4/10; p = 0.033) and POD2 (2.4/10 vs. 3.0/10; p = 0.037). Furthermore, patients undergoing rib-sparing techniques had greater incidence of fat necrosis requiring excision (12.5 vs. 2.8%; p < 0.01) and a trend toward higher incidence of hematoma, venous thrombosis, and arterial thrombosis when compared with rib-sacrificing patients. Conclusions Rib-sparing harvest of internal mammary vessels is a feasible technique in microsurgical breast reconstruction. However, given the significant increase in fat necrosis requiring surgical excision, the trend toward increased postoperative complications, and no significant difference in postoperative revision rates, the purported benefits of this technique may fail to outweigh the possible risks.
PMID: 26258918
ISSN: 1098-8947
CID: 2061682
Oncologic outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy: A single-institution experience
INTRODUCTION: Long-term oncologic outcomes in nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) continue to be defined. Rates of locoregional recurrence for skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and NSM in the literature range from 0% to 14.3%. We investigated the outcomes of NSM at our institution. METHODS: Patients undergoing NSM at our institution from 2006 to 2014 were identified and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2014, 319 patients (555 breasts) underwent NSM. One-hundered and fourty-one patients (237 breasts) had long-term follow-up available. Average patient age and BMI were 47.78 and 24.63. Eighty-four percent of patients underwent mastectomy primarily for a therapeutic indication. Average tumor size was 1.50 cm with the most common histologic type being invasive ductal carcinoma (62.7%) followed by DCIS (23.7%). Average patient follow-up was 30.73 months. There was one (0.8%) incidence of ipsilateral chest-wall recurrence. There were 0.37 complications per patient. CONCLUSIONS: We examined our institutional outcomes with NSM and found a locoregional recurrence rate of 0.8% with no nipple-areolar complex recurrence. This rate is lower than published rates for both NSM and SSM. J. Surg. Oncol. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PMID: 26628318
ISSN: 1096-9098
CID: 1863442
