Faculty Bibliography

Gustilo IIIC injuries of the lower extremity pose a significant challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. Key principles include early vascular repair and serial debridement followed by definitive coverage within 10 days. Primary reconstructive options following vascular repair include the anterolateral thigh flap or the latissimus dorsi muscle flap. Complications include elevated rates of microvascular thrombosis requiring return to the operating room, partial and complete flap loss, and infection. There is also an elevated rate of secondary amputation. However, in spite of higher complication rates, when approached thoughtfully and with an experienced multidisciplinary team, patients can achieve reasonable functional outcomes.

Understanding the risk factors that contribute to post-mastectomy complications can better inform preoperative discussions. Here, we assess the impact of the 5-Factor Frailty Index Score (mFI-5) in predicting 30-day postoperative complications in patients undergoing mastectomy. A retrospective review of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) data base was conducted for patients older than 65 undergoing mastectomy between 2010 and 2015. We assessed each patient's Frailty Index Score using the mFI-5. Primary outcomes included wound complications and overall complications. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analyses were used to determine the ability of the mFI-5 to predict postoperative outcomes. A total of 13,783 patients were analyzed. The rate of wound complications was 3.0%, while the rate of overall complications was 6.0%. An mFI-5 score greater than 2 was an independent risk factor for wound complications and overall complications. Overall, patients undergoing mastectomy with an mFI-5 of 2 or greater experienced higher rates of postoperative complications. The mFI-5 is an accessible tool that can be used to risk-stratify patients undergoing mastectomy and can positively contribute to the informed consent and shared decision-making process.

SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:There remain significant gaps in the evidence-based care of patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy with regard to implications for breast cancer development and screening. The current clinical evidence does not demonstrate an increased risk of breast cancer secondary to testosterone therapy in transgender patients. Gender-affirmation mastectomy techniques vary significantly with regard to the amount of residual breast tissue left behind, which has unknown implications for the incidence of postoperative breast cancer and need for screening. Subcutaneous mastectomy should aim to remove all gross breast parenchyma, although this is limited in certain techniques. Tissue specimens should also be routinely sent for pathologic analysis. Several cases of incidental breast cancer after subcutaneous mastectomy have been described. There is little evidence on the need for or types of postoperative cancer screening. Chest awareness is an important concept for patients that have undergone subcutaneous mastectomies, as clinical examination remains the most common reported method of postmastectomy malignancy detection. In patients with greater known retained breast tissue, such as those with circumareolar or pedicled techniques, consideration may be given to alternative imaging modalities, although the efficacy and cost-utility of these techniques must still be proven. Preoperative patient counseling on the risk of breast cancer after gender-affirming mastectomy in addition to the unknown implications of residual breast tissue and long-term androgen exposure is critical. Patient awareness and education play an important role in shared decision-making, as further research is needed to define standards of medical and oncologic care in this population.

OBJECTIVE:This pooled analysis evaluates the association between the number of nerves transferred and postoperative outcomes after intercostal nerve (ICN) nerve transfer for elbow flexion. METHODS:A systematic and pooled analysis of studies reporting individual patient demographics and outcomes after ICN-musculocutaneous nerve (MCN) transfer for traumatic brachial plexus injury was conducted. The primary outcome was the ability to attain an elbow flexion Medical Research Council (MRC) score of ≥4 at the final postoperative follow-up visit. RESULTS: = 0.126). CONCLUSIONS:These results indicate that two ICN transfers may be as effective as three ICN and four ICN transfers and highlight the potential for nonsurgical factors to influence postoperative outcomes. Taken together, this pooled analysis leads us to question the utility of transferring >2 ICNs for MCN neurotization.

BACKGROUND:A long-term neurocognitive comparison of patients with sagittal synostosis who underwent spring-assisted surgery or cranial vault remodeling has not been performed. METHODS:Patients with sagittal synostosis who underwent spring-assisted surgery or cranial vault remodeling were recruited from Wake Forest School of Medicine and Yale School of Medicine, respectively. Cognitive tests administered included an abbreviated intelligence quotient, academic achievement, and visuomotor integration. An analysis of covariance model compared cohorts controlling for demographic variables. RESULTS:Thirty-nine spring-assisted surgery and 36 cranial vault remodeling patients were included in the study. No significant differences between cohorts were found with respect to age at surgery, sex, race, birth weight, family income, or parental education. The cranial vault cohort had significantly older parental age (p < 0.001), and mean age at testing for the spring cohort was significantly higher (p = 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, the cranial vault cohort had significantly higher verbal intelligence quotient (116.5 versus 104.3; p = 0.0024), performance intelligence quotient (109.2 versus 101.5; p = 0.041), and full-scale intelligence quotient (114.3 versus 103.2; p = 0.0032). When included patients were limited to intelligence quotients from 80 to 120, the cranial vault cohort maintained higher verbal (108.0 versus 100.4; p = 0.036), performance (104.5 versus 97.7; p = 0.016), and full-scale (107.6 versus 101.5; p = 0.038) intelligence quotients. The cranial vault cohort had higher visuomotor integration scores than the surgery group (111.1 versus 98.1; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in academic achievement. CONCLUSIONS:Sagittal synostosis patients who underwent cranial vault remodeling had higher intelligence quotient and visuomotor integration scores. There were no differences in academic achievement. Both cohorts had intelligence quotient scores at or above the normal range. Further studies are warranted to identify factors that may contribute to cognitive outcome differences. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic, II.

Since its introduction by Smith and Robinson, the anterior approach to the subaxial cervical spine has become one of the standard procedures for numerous cervical spine pathologies, including, but not limited to degenerative disease, trauma, tumor, deformity, and instability. Along with its increasing popularity and improvements in anterior instrumentation techniques, a comprehensive knowledge of the surgical anatomy during the anterior exposure is critical for trainees and experienced spine surgeons alike to minimize the infrequent but potentially devastating risks associated with this approach. Understanding the anatomy and techniques to minimize damage to relevant structures can reduce the risks of developing notable postoperative complications and morbidity.

BACKGROUND: All women undergoing a mastectomy have the right to reconstruction. However, many women do not receive reconstruction and many more are not aware of all the reconstructive options available to them. Travel distance to a center that provides reconstruction and subsequent follow-up may be a contributing factor to this disparity especially among those who seek microsurgical options. Telehealth, which provides patients with remote video consultations and decreases the travel burden, may be a solution to optimize the accessibility of breast reconstruction for these patients. The purpose of this study was to discuss the efficacy and reliability of telehealth to overcome geographic barriers. METHODS: Patients who received breast reconstruction and participated in video telehealth visits between February and May 2020 were included in this study. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical outcomes were collected. Video telehealth encounters were reviewed to determine specific concerns and questions discussed during these encounters. RESULTS: A total of 235 breast reconstruction surgery patient encounters were recorded for 4 plastic surgeons who offer microsurgical breast reconstruction. Eighty-eight patients (37.4%) were seen as telehealth visits, 20 (22.7%) of which were new patient visits. Eight (9.09%) patients were microsurgical breast reconstruction candidates and 25 (28.4%) were following-up after microsurgical breast reconstruction. The majority of telehealth visits included normally healing wounds in the postoperative patient. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth provides an avenue for premastectomy consultation, second opinion visits, and postoperative follow-up for patients who have geographical barriers precluding them from reaching plastic surgeons who perform all types of breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND:The effect of body mass index (BMI) on complication rates in prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction is not well established. The purpose of this study was to compare complication rates between different BMI groups in subpectoral and prepectoral reconstruction. METHODS:A single-surgeon, 4-year, retrospective review was performed of consecutive prosthetic breast reconstructions. During this time, the senior author's practice shifted from a subpectoral to prepectoral technique. Patients were stratified into BMI subgroups (<25, 25-35, and >35 kg/m2) and complication rates were analyzed. A survey was administered to blinded medical personnel and patients comparing esthetic results. RESULTS:Implant-based reconstructions were performed in 195 patients (103 subpectoral and 92 prepectoral). No significant difference in major complication rate was observed between techniques. Among patients with BMI greater than 35 kg/m2, implant exposure occurred at a significantly higher rate in the prepectoral group (P = 0.04). In patients with BMI greater than 25 kg/m2, minor asymmetry was more prevalent with prepectoral reconstruction (12.3% vs 0%; P = 0.02). Regardless of technique, the odds of reoperation increased by 7% per point increase in BMI, although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.07; odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.15).A total of 66 survey responses were received. Physicians rated esthetic results more positively than patients did. Patients with a BMI of less than 25 kg/m2 were rated better than other BMI groups in nearly all categories. The position of submuscular reconstruction was rated significantly better than prepectoral. CONCLUSIONS:There is a trend toward higher complication rates in prepectoral versus subpectoral breast reconstruction with increasing BMI. Nonetheless, the technique appears to be safe, with comparable clinical and cosmetic results.