Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:There has been increasing emphasis on patient-reported satisfaction as a measure of surgical outcomes. While previous research has investigated factors influencing patient satisfaction following breast reconstruction, there are few studies on how patient satisfaction is impacted by revision procedures. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether elective revisions following breast reconstruction are significantly associated with changes in patient-reported outcomes and quality of life. METHODS:A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent immediate autologous or alloplastic breast reconstruction at a single institution from 2015-2021. Patients were included if they had completed BREAST-Q pre-operatively, post-initial reconstruction, and post-revision procedures. Patients were excluded if they received adjuvant radiation or if they had previously undergone breast reconstruction procedures. The primary outcome measures were BREAST-Q domains. Demographic, clinical, and surgical variables were also analyzed. RESULTS:Of the 123 patients included for analysis, 61 underwent autologous breast reconstruction and 62 underwent alloplastic reconstruction. Mean age was 49.31 ± 11.58 years and BMI was 29.55 ± 5.63 kg/m2. 48 patients underwent no revision procedures and 75 patients underwent at least one revision. Between these two groups, there were no differences in age, BMI, complication rates, socioeconomic status, or pre-operative BREAST-Q scores. Patients reported significantly higher satisfaction with outcome after their first revision compared to after initial reconstruction alone (p=0.04). Autologous reconstruction patients who had at least one revision had significantly higher Satisfaction with Outcome (p=0.02) and Satisfaction with Surgeon (p=0.05) in the 2-year follow-up period compared to patients who had no revisions. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Revision procedures following autologous breast reconstruction are associated with higher patient satisfaction with outcome. Further research should explore specific factors influencing patient decision-making regarding whether to undergo revisions.

BACKGROUND:The iPhone (Apple Inc, Cupertino, California) contains a high-fidelity 3D-scanner and is widely distributed in the United States. Presently, 3D analysis of the breast necessitates ownership of cost-prohibitive cameras and software packages such as the Vectra system. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:We compared the accuracy of 3D photos of the breast obtained with the iPhone X 3D scanner against the Canfield Vectra H2 (Canfield Scientific Inc. Parsippany, NJ) in an effort to expand access to 3D technology in plastic surgery. METHODS:Twenty breasts (n=20) were 3D-photographed with iPhone X and the Vectra H2 and compared with color map analysis and by measuring distances across the model between key anatomical landmarks. These distances included sternal notch to nipple (SN-N), mid-chest to nipple (M-N), nipple to mid-inframammary fold (N-IMF), and inframammary fold width (IMF). Statistical tests included the Bland-Altman Plot analysis. RESULTS:When comparing absolute differences in distances between key anatomical landmarks, the average discrepancy in measurements between iPhone and Vectra image pairs were the following: SN-N: 0.94mm, M-N: 0.70mm, N-IMF 0.81mm, and IMF 0.96mm. Colormap analysis demonstrated an average error of 1.53mm, mean of 0.53mm, and standard deviation of ±1.81mm. Bland-Altman Plot revealed a mean difference of 0.13mm and an agreement interval between -1.90 and 2.17mm. CONCLUSIONS:The iPhone is capable of capturing 3D-photographs with a high level of fidelity when compared to Vectra. 3D-scans obtained with the iPhone may be useful for planning nipple position, measuring the breast footprint, choosing implants, and performing other functions using 3D technology that are typically performed using the more expensive systems.

BACKGROUND:Microsurgical breast reconstruction after mastectomy is now the standard of care for breast cancer patients. However, the costs and resources involved in free flap reconstruction can vary across different medical settings. To enhance patient outcomes in a cost-effective manner, we investigated the effect of intravenous magnesium sulfate (IV Mg) on postoperative opioid usage in this context. METHODS:A retrospective chart review was performed on all consecutive patients who underwent abdominal-based free flap breast reconstruction in a single institute following an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol. Patients who received IV Mg were compared with those who did not receive supplementation. Serum magnesium levels at different time points, narcotic consumption in units of oral morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), and other postoperative recovery parameters were compared. RESULTS:82 patients were included. Those who received IV Mg on postoperative day 0 (n=67) showed significantly lower serum magnesium levels before repletion (1.5 mg/dL vs. 1.7 mg/dL, p=0.004) and significantly higher levels on postoperative day 1 after repletion (2.2 mg/dL vs. 1.7 mg/dL, p=0.0002) compared to patients who received no magnesium repletion (n=13). While both groups required a similar amount of narcotics on postoperative day 0 (20.2 MMEs vs. 13.2 MMEs, p=0.2), those who received IV Mg needed significantly fewer narcotics for pain control on postoperative day 1 (12.2 MMEs for IV Mg vs. 19.8 MMEs for No Mg, p=0.03). Recovery parameters, including maximal pain scores, postoperative mobilization, and length of hospital stay, did not significantly differ between the two groups. CONCLUSION This is the first study to describe the potential analgesic benefits of routine postoperative magnesium repletion in abdominal-based free flap reconstruction, although further research is necessary to fully understand the role of perioperative magnesium supplementation as part of an ERAS protocol.

Breast ptosis presents challenges for implant-based reconstruction due to the large skin envelope. Skin-reducing mastectomy reduces the envelope but must consider many other factors including complications. Limited data exist on incision impact on outcomes. We compare oblique-elliptical and Wise-pattern incisions on complications and patient-reported quality of life in immediate implant-based reconstruction.A retrospective review of patients who underwent immediate implant-based skin-reducing mastectomy at a single institution from 2015 to 2021 was done and was divided into two cohorts: wise and oblique incisions. Demographics, complications, and patient-reported outcomes (BREAST-Q) were compared. Descriptive, t test, and chi-square test analyses, followed by adjusted linear and logistic regression models, were performed to compare complication rates and BREAST-Q scores.Eighty-nine patient breasts were analyzed, 39 (43.8%) in the oblique (OI) and 50 (56.2%) in the wise (WI) cohort. No differences in demographics or preoperative comorbidities between groups were found. The oblique incision patients had significantly more mean total complications (OI 1.46 vs WI 0.88; P = 0.048), as well as increased incidence of explantation (OI 15 vs WI 3; P = 0.003) and cellulitis (OI 14 vs WI 3; P = 0.020) compared to wise group. Linear regression analysis revealed that incision choice was a significant predictor of complication rate (β = -1.06, 95% CI [-1.63--0.50], P = <0.001). Logistic regression analysis showed that incision was a significant predictor of specific complications such as explantation (odds ratio = 0.10, 95% CI [0.02-0.52], P = 0.006) and cellulitis (odds ratio = 0.16, 95% CI [0.03-0.73], P = 0.018), with decreased risk of choosing wise incision. There was no difference in BREAST-Q results.Ptotic patients with oblique incision are associated with higher rates of postoperative complications compared to wise incisions.These findings suggest that incision choice is an important factor in postoperative complication development and emphasizes the need for further investigation and discussion with patients during preoperative planning.

BACKGROUND:Breast reduction mammaplasty is among the most common procedures in plastic surgery, with a 1% to 7% postoperative hematoma incidence reported. Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been shown to reduce perioperative bleeding and need for transfusion when administered intravenously or topically, but it remains underused in plastic surgery. This study aims to investigate whether topical administration of topical TXA reduces postoperative hematoma following breast reduction mammaplasty. METHODS:A double-blind randomized controlled trial of 98 patients (196 breasts) undergoing bilateral primary reduction mammaplasty at a single academic institution was performed. Patients were used as internal matched controls, with one breast randomized to receive 1000 mg of topical TXA before closure, and the other receiving saline. All members of the surgical team and the patient were blinded as to which breast received the study drug. Postoperative complications, including hematoma within 30 days of surgery, drain outputs, and duration of drain use, were compared between treatment and placebo breasts. RESULTS:The overall hematoma rate was 1.5%. There was no significant association between application of TXA and development of a hematoma ( P = 0.56) or other complications. The hematoma rate of patients enrolled in the trial was similar to the overall rate of hematoma during the study period (1.5% versus 2.4%; P = 0.511). In a multivariate model, TXA was not significantly associated with differences in drain output after controlling for resection weight, age, and duration of drain use ( P = 0.799). No adverse effects or thromboembolic events from TXA were observed. CONCLUSION:Topical application of TXA does not decrease the incidence of hematoma following reduction mammaplasty. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic, I.

BACKGROUND: While the number of female plastic surgeons has continued to increase over time, plastic surgery has historically been a male-dominated profession with only 15% of practicing plastic surgeons being female. Microsurgery, as a subspecialty, has been long perceived as an even more male-centric career path. The objective of this study was to determine the representation of females in the subspecialty field of microsurgery and the impact of microsurgical fellowship training. METHODS: A review of all microsurgery fellowship programs participating in the microsurgery fellowship match from 2010 to 2019 were analyzed. Fellows were identified through fellowship Web site pages or direct contact with fellowship program coordinators and directors. The current type of practice and performance of microsurgery were also identified through a Web search and direct contact with fellowship program coordinators and directors. RESULTS: = 0.29). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: Women are underrepresented in the field of microsurgery to a similar extent as they are underrepresented in overall plastic surgery. While there is a small insignificant increase in the number of female microsurgery fellows every year, a significantly smaller proportion of females continue to practice microsurgery compared to males.

BACKGROUND:Plastic surgery training has undergone tremendous change and transitioned through many models over the years, including independent, combined, and integrated. This study evaluates how these changes and others have affected plastic surgery applicants' demographics and academic qualifications over the last 30 years. METHODS:Data on applicant demographics and academic qualifications were extracted from multiple sources including the National Resident Matching Program, the American Association of Medical Colleges, and cross-sectional surveys of plastic surgery applicants for the years 1992, 2005, 2011, and 2022. Data were compared using pairwise χ2 goodness of fit tests. RESULTS:The sex distribution of plastic surgery applicants changed significantly over the last 30 years: whereas men predominated in 1992 (86% male vs 14% female), by 2011, the distribution was nearly equal (54% male vs 46% female in both 2011 and 2022, P < 0.001).The racial makeup of applicants also changed over time (P < 0.05). White applicants decreased from 73% in 1992 to 55% in 2011, and 53% in 2022. While there was an increase in Asian (7% to > 17% to > 20%) and other (13% to > 14% to > 21%) applicants over time, whereas the proportion of Black applicants remained stagnant (5% to > 6% to > 8%).Applicants with prior general surgery experience declined precipitously over the years: 96% in 1992, 64% in 2005, 37% in 2011, and 26% in 2022 (P < 0.001). When compared with 1992, Alpha Omega Alpha status increased significantly in 2011 (36% vs 12%, P < 0.05) but did not change considerably in 2005 (22%) and 2022 (23%). Research experience increased dramatically over the years, with the proportion of applicants with at least one publication going from 43% in 1992, to 75% in 2005, to 89% in 2011, and to 99% in 2022 (P < 0.001). Applicant interest in academic plastic surgery did not change considerably over the years at roughly ranging from 30% to 50% of applicants (P = ns). CONCLUSIONS:There has been a shift in the demographics and academic qualifications of plastic surgery applicants over the last 3 decades. Understanding this evolution is critical for reviewing and evaluating the makeup of our specialty, and enacting changes to increase representation where necessary.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) has demonstrated superior cosmetic outcomes to traditional breast-conserving surgery (BCS) while maintaining oncologic safety. While prior studies have compared OBCS to mastectomy, there is a scarcity of literature on the impact of social determinants of health on outcomes. Furthermore, although traditionally tumors larger than 5 cm and multifocal disease were treated with mastectomy, the literature has now shown OBCS to be safe in treating such disease. As a result, patients with large or multifocal tumors could be eligible for both mastectomy and OBCS, which prompts the need for comparison between the two. Thus, the aim of our study was to compare OBCS and mastectomy with reconstruction using BREAST-Q and oncologic outcome measures, as well as stratify these outcomes based on race, ethnicity, and body mass index (BMI). METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective chart review was performed for 57 patients treated with OBCS and 204 patients treated with mastectomy with reconstruction from 2015 to 2021. Variables including age, race, ethnicity, BMI, insurance status, surgery type, pathology, recurrence, and complications were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded using BREAST-Q pre- and post-operatively. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Despite having a higher BMI (P<0.001), OBCS yielded higher "satisfaction with breast" and "satisfaction with outcome" than mastectomy (P=0.02 and P=0.02, respectively). When stratified by race, there were no statistical differences in the PROs between the two surgeries for Hispanic nor African American patients. OBCS had a significantly lower rate of infection and fewer additional surgeries than mastectomy (P=0.004 and P<0.001, respectively). There were no differences in positive margin rate or recurrence rate between the groups. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:In our study, OBCS yielded better PROs than mastectomy while maintaining oncologic safety and resulting in fewer surgeries and complications. These excellent outcomes in a majority non-Caucasian cohort support the utilization of OBCS for underserved, minority populations. Larger studies evaluating PROs in diverse and uninsured groups are needed to reinforce these conclusions.

BACKGROUND:Mastectomy flap necrosis (MFN) is a common complication of immediate breast reconstruction that greatly affects patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcomes. Topical nitroglycerin ointment, with its low cost and negligible side effects, has been shown to significantly decrease the incidence of MFN in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction, but its utility has not been studied in immediate autologous reconstruction. METHODS:With institutional review board approval, a prospective cohort study was performed of all consecutive patients undergoing immediate free-flap breast reconstruction by a single reconstructive surgeon at a single institution between February of 2017 and September of 2021. Patients were divided into two cohorts: those who received 30 mg of topical nitroglycerin ointment to each breast at the conclusion of the operation (September of 2019 to September of 2021) and those who did not (February of 2017 to August of 2019). All patients underwent intraoperative SPY angiography, and mastectomy skin flaps were débrided intraoperatively based on imaging. Independent demographic variables were analyzed, and dependent outcome variables included mastectomy skin flap necrosis, headache, and hypotension requiring removal of ointment. RESULTS:A total of 35 patients (49 breasts) were included in the nitroglycerin cohort and 34 patients (49 breasts) were included in the control group. There was no significant difference in patient demographics, medical comorbidities, or mastectomy weight between cohorts. The rate of MFN decreased from 51% in the control group to 26.5% in the group that received nitroglycerin ointment ( P = 0.013). There were no documented adverse events associated with nitroglycerin use. CONCLUSION:Topical nitroglycerin ointment significantly decreases the rate of MFN in patients undergoing immediate autologous breast reconstruction without significant adverse effects. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic, II.

BACKGROUND:Implant-based reconstruction remains the most common form of postmastectomy breast reconstruction. With ever-evolving device characteristics, including the advent of high-profile, cohesive, fifth-generation implants, the incidence of anterior-posterior flipping of implants is presenting a new challenge. Patient and device characteristics associated with this phenomenon have yet to be fully elucidated. METHODS:Patients who underwent nipple- or skin-sparing mastectomy with subsequent 2-stage or direct-to-implant reconstruction with smooth implants between 2015 and 2021 were retrospectively identified and stratified by incidence of implant flipping. Patient, procedural, and device characteristics were evaluated. RESULTS:Within 165 patients (255 reconstructed breasts), 14 cases of implant flipping were identified (flip rate 5.5%). All flips occurred in patients with cohesive implants (odds ratio [OR], 87.0; P = 0.002). On univariate analysis, extra full implant profile (OR, 11.2; P < 0.001) and use of a smooth tissue expander for 2-stage reconstruction (OR, 4.1; P = 0.03) were associated with flipping. Implants that flipped were larger than those that did not (652.5 ± 117.8 vs 540.1 ± 171.0 mL, P = 0.0004). Prepectoral implant placement (OR, 2.7; P = 0.08) and direct-to-implant method (OR, 3.17; P = 0.07) trended toward association, but this effect was not significant. Patient BMI, weight fluctuation during the reconstructive course, mastectomy weight, AlloDerm use, and history of seroma or periprosthetic infection were not associated with flipping. CONCLUSION:Patients who receive a highly cohesive, high profile, larger implant are at increased risk for implant flipping. In addition, patients who receive a smooth tissue expander are more likely to experience flipping of their subsequent implant, compared with those who had textured tissue expanders. These characteristics warrant consideration during device selection to minimize discomfort, aesthetic deformity, and the need for reoperation.