Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Use of soft tissue support in postmastectomy, implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) has become increasingly common. Although soft tissue support (STS) offers benefits in terms of stability and contour, in some instances, its use has been associated with increased postoperative complications. This study assesses rates of postoperative complications following IBBR with and without soft tissue support in a large, nationwide database. METHODS:Using Epic Cosmos, a nationwide database of over 300 million patients, patients undergoing postmastectomy IBBR with implantation of a breast implant or tissue expander (CPT 19340) between 2015 and 2025 were identified. Patients were stratified by use of STS (CPT 15777). Primary outcomes included complications within 90 days of surgery: surgical site infection (SSI), seroma, hematoma, wound dehiscence, and implant loss. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each complication, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS:Among 66,862 patients undergoing IBBR, 32,680 (48.9%) received STS and 34,182 (51.1%) did not. Average BMI was higher in patients with STS (26.9 ± 5.80 vs 26.5 ± 5.74 kg/m 2 , P < 0.05). STS was used less frequently among current smokers (3.7% vs 6.0%, P < 0.05). Adjusting for age, BMI, smoking status, and type 2 diabetes status, STS use was associated with increased odds of surgical site infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.13-4.90; P < 0.05), seroma (aOR, 2.38; 95% CI, 2.07-2.73; P < 0.05), hematoma (aOR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.46-1.95; P < 0.05), wound dehiscence (aOR, 2.58; 95% CI, 2.31-2.89; P < 0.05), and implant loss (aOR, 3.40; 95% CI, 3.00-3.88; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:In this nationwide cohort, use of soft tissue support in postmastectomy breast reconstruction was associated with a higher risk of select postoperative complications. These findings underscore the importance of patient selection and shared decision making when considering mesh in breast reconstruction, particularly in patients with modifiable comorbidities such as obesity or smoking.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:This study aimed to develop a machine learning model to predict seroma risk following prepectoral breast reconstruction. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:-nearest neighbors, decision tree, and random forest. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Chart review identified 318 breasts that underwent prepectoral reconstruction, with a seroma rate of 25.58%. Univariate analysis found that body mass index, mastectomy specimen weight, hypertension, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and skin-sparing mastectomy were positively associated with seroma. Method 1 identified the decision tree to have the highest accuracy (0.81) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.81). Method 2 improved model performance. The random forest achieved the best results, with an accuracy of 0.81 and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.83. A web application was then created using the random forest model to provide real-time seroma risk predictions. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Machine learning models offer a valuable tool for improving clinical decision-making by accurately predicting patient-specific seroma risk in breast reconstruction. Our models outperformed traditional methods in identifying high-risk patients, allowing for tailored surgical techniques and intensified follow-up care.

Patients requiring breast reconstruction following radiation therapy or prior failed autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) or implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) represent a challenging cohort and often present with compromised vascularity, scarred anatomy, and subsequent increased rates of complications. In this review, we discuss microsurgical strategies designed to optimize donor tissue in these challenging clinical scenarios, including the use of stacked or bipedicled flaps, and the utility of intraoperative indocyanine green angiography. We also review approaches to alternate recipient vessel selection in the suboptimal chest, and we address specific strategies for the revision setting, like soft tissue support and hybrid reconstruction with ABR and IBBR. By synthesizing the current literature and expert experience, this narrative review provides a practical framework for microsurgeons managing complex breast reconstruction in higher-risk patients.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction offers esthetic and recovery advantages but may be more vulnerable to complications due to the absence of muscular coverage. This study examined the clinical course of patients with failed prepectoral implant reconstruction. All consecutive prepectoral reconstructions performed between March 2017 and July 2022 at a single tertiary center were reviewed. Of 239 reconstructions, 42 (17.5%) ultimately failed, most commonly due to infection (50%). Sixteen patients (38%) underwent definitive reconstruction with a median interval of 379 days (IQR 249) from initial surgery to final reconstruction. The most common secondary reconstruction modalities were implant-based reconstruction (31%) and free-tissue transfer (31%). On multivariate analysis, increasing age, higher body mass index (BMI), and prior radiation were independently associated with implant loss. Failure of salvage after prepectoral reconstruction remains a major challenge and often results in delayed or abandoned reconstruction, highlighting the need for careful patient selection.

BACKGROUND:Umbilicoplasty is a critical step in donor-site closure following abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction (ABR). While various incision designs and transposition techniques have been described, their impact on patient- and surgeon-assessed aesthetic outcomes remains poorly defined. METHODS:A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched through August 1, 2025, for studies evaluating umbilicoplasty after ABR. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series reporting surgical technique, aesthetic, and/or patient satisfaction outcomes. Data extraction included study characteristics, surgical techniques, patient- and surgeon-assessed aesthetic outcomes, and complications. Risk of bias was assessed using standardized tools. RESULTS:Eight studies comprising 362 patients met inclusion criteria. Umbilicoplasty techniques varied, including oval, U/inverted-U, and Mercedes/inverted Mercedes as well as a neo-umbilicoplasty approaches. Complication rates were low with hypertrophic scarring and umbilical stenosis being most common. Aesthetic outcomes were variably reported, with limited use of validated scales, but generally favored designs that avoid an uninterrupted oval. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:While reported complication rates are low, methodological limitations and underreporting preclude definitive conclusions about technique safety or superiority. Umbilicoplasty should be individualized, with careful attention to perfusion. Future studies should prioritize standardized reporting, validated outcome measures, and multicenter collaboration to strengthen the evidence base and guide best practices in abdominally based breast reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III/METHODS:This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Prepectoral direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction has gained popularity for reducing postoperative pain, animation deformity, and the number of surgical procedures. However, the limited vascularized tissue overlying the implant presents challenges. This study evaluated mean 18-month outcomes in prepectoral DTI patients using a poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB) wrap designed to optimize reconstructive results. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients who underwent prepectoral DTI breast reconstruction with our P4HB-implant construct. Data were collected via chart review. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:. The mean (± SD) follow-up time was 18.1 (± 5.1) months. Thirty (30 of 50, 60%) patients did not require further procedures beyond the index operation. No patients had implant malposition/dystopia. Of patients requiring a subsequent operation, the majority (12 of 20, 60%) of operations were for aesthetic optimization. Eight (8 of 87, 9.2%) breasts required a subsequent operation due to complications with 4 (4 of 87, 4.6%) of these breasts requiring removal of the construct. Increased BMI and age were found to significantly decrease the odds of rippling (odds ratios 0.73 and 0.89, respectively), and increased BMI was also found to significantly increase the odds of major complications (odds ratio 1.21). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This is the first study reporting mean 18-month P4HB outcomes in prepectoral DTI breast reconstruction at full hydrolysis. Most patients did not require revisional procedures during the follow-up period, and reoperations were primarily for aesthetic concerns. These findings suggest that P4HB is an effective adjunct for implant stabilization in breast reconstruction.

Several biologic and synthetic adjuncts have been employed to reduce ptosis and improve cosmesis in breast surgery. Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB), a fully absorbable polymer, continues to increase in use. This study sought to identify uses of P4HB in both reconstructive and aesthetic breast surgery and synthesize the available data on its outcomes and efficacy. A literature search was performed from inception to May 2024 following PRISMA in PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Two independent reviewers screened the studies for eligibility. Bibliographies and citing references from selected articles from Scopus (Elsevier) were also reviewed. The search identified 372 studies, with 16 articles included. All prospective and retrospective case series utilizing P4HB reported high rates of patient satisfaction and scaffold incorporation as well as low complication rates including recurrent ptosis, implant malposition, and capsular contracture. One retrospective cohort study reported significantly higher rates of capsular contracture with use of P4HB sling in dual-plane, two-stage breast reconstruction. No other studies reported significantly higher rates of capsular contracture with P4HB and no other significant differences in complication rates were noted. Two animal studies exploring the use of P4HB in nipple reconstruction reported that P4HB promoted the growth of fibrovascular tissue with higher rates of nipple projection with respect to control. This study supports P4HB as a safe and efficacious adjunct in a variety of indications. Large-scale, randomized trials between P4HB and other types of soft-tissue support are needed to further delineate the above trends.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:A seroma following prepectoral tissue expander (TE) reconstruction often begets other complications, which may compromise the reconstruction. This study investigated the association between seroma and subsequent complications. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:All consecutive prepectoral TE reconstructions performed between March 2017 and December 2022 at a single center were reviewed. Demographics, operative characteristics, and complications data were extracted for all patients and analyzed. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:< 0.01). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Although causality cannot be determined, our data suggests that seroma may be the "kiss of death" in prepectoral TE reconstruction because half of all breasts with a seroma went on to develop other complications.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Although many factors in prepectoral breast reconstruction such as mastectomy weight and flap quality are out of the plastic surgeon's control, some elements such as intraoperative tissue expander (TE) fill can be optimized. This study assesses the impact of intraoperative TE fill on postoperative complications in prepectoral breast reconstruction and posits the optimal fill. METHODS:All consecutive, prepectoral TE reconstructions performed between March 2017 and December 2022 at a single center were reviewed. A "fill ratio" or ratio of intraoperative TE fill to mastectomy weight (TEF/MW) was constructed to quantify deadspace in the breast pocket, with values closer to 1 signifying less deadspace. Major complications include those requiring readmission or reoperation and minor complications include those that could be treated as an outpatient. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS:A total of 200 patients (318 breasts) with average follow-up of 22 months were included. Patients were, on average, 53 years old, were nonsmoker (98%), were nondiabetic (91%), and had a body mass index of 26 kg/m2. Only immediate reconstructions were included and were performed following prophylactic mastectomies in 34% and therapeutic mastectomies in 66% of cases. Seventy-six (24%) breasts were radiated, and 93 (47%) patients received chemotherapy. Mean mastectomy weight was 546 g, median intraoperative TE fill was 175 ± 250 cc, and median final TE fill was 390 ± 220 cc.Major complications occurred in 64 (20%) breasts and were associated with less deadspace (0.49 vs 0.36, P < 0.05). In multivariable models, a higher fill ratio was associated with 2.4 times higher odds of major complications (95% CI, 1.2-4.7; P = 0.01). Optimal intraoperative TE fill for avoiding major complications was 80 cc, and optimal fill ratio was 0.09.Explantation occurred in 44 (14%) breasts and was associated with less deadspace (0.51 vs 0.35, P < 0.05); the optimal fill for avoiding explantation was 80 cc, and optimal ratio was 0.12. CONCLUSIONS:Higher intraoperative TE fill and less deadspace were associated with postoperative complications. Filling a TE to 80 cc or approximately a tenth of mastectomy weight may reduce complications.

BACKGROUND:Reports suggest neurotization can help restore sensation in patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). There is a dearth of information regarding the outcomes and cost associated with neurotization of the nipple-areola complex (NAC). The objective of this study is to determine perioperative complications of performing NAC neurotization in IBBR and analyze the added cost of performing this procedure. METHODS:A retrospective chart review was performed of patients who underwent NSM with IBBR. Breasts undergoing neurotization of the NAC were compared to breasts that did not undergo neurotization using 2:1 propensity score matching on age, reconstruction type, and BMI. Primary endpoints included 30-day complications and cost. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, t tests, and chi-square tests where applicable with a predetermined level of significance of P < 0.05. RESULTS:A total of 15 patients (26 breasts) were in the neurotized cohort and matched to 30 patients (52 breasts) in the nonneurotized cohort. Mean follow-up period was 10 months and significantly lower in neurotized group (P < 0.001). Rates of major and minor complications did not vary by neurotization (P > 0.05). Cases of neurotization added a mean cost of $7839 per breast. CONCLUSIONS:As NAC neurotization introduces increased complexity from coordination with the oncologic surgeons, use of microsurgical instruments, and additional implantable devices, it is important to compare perioperative outcomes to standard breast reconstruction. As our institution begins to offer this new technique, we have identified no increased risk of perioperative complications with NAC neurotization.