AbstractPyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a diagnosis of exclusion worsened by surgical debridement. This report presents two atypical manifestations of PG in the reconstructed breast, whereby the disease is only confined to the irradiated chest wall tissue bed, sparing the abdominal donor sites and the contralateral reconstructed breast.
Aesthetic Surgery Research Funding: Where Does It Come From and to Whom Does It Go?
Abstract Background Recent data show that aesthetic surgery research is lagging compared with reconstructive surgery: research funding and institutional disparities within aesthetic surgery are potential factors in this trend. Objectives The authors sought to determine if disparities exist in aesthetic surgery research based on funding sources or practice settings. Methods The authors reviewed Aesthetic Surgery Journal articles from 2009 to 2019. Chi-square, t test, bivariate, and multivariate regression analyses were employed to evaluate research trends. Results A total of 2262 publications were identified, with 318 funded articles meeting inclusion criteria. The majority of studies (294, 92%) received external funding, with 281 (88%) being supported solely by external funds. Externally funded studies were financed by private industry (194, 66%), foundations/societies (53, 18%), government grants (23, 8%), or a combination of agencies (24, 8%). The majority of funded studies were at academic institutions (266, 84%), followed by private practice (46, 14%) and private industry (6, 2%). Analysis of annual publications revealed a rising percentage of academic-based research, which correlated with decreasing research from private practice (r = −0.95, r2 = 0.89, P < 0.001). Compared with academic institutions, private practice relied more heavily on industry funding (55% vs 87%, respectively, P = 0.001), exhibiting lower rates of foundational/societal (20% vs 2%), governmental (9% vs 0%), combined (8% vs 7%), and internal department funding (8% vs 4%). Article citations and level of evidence were unaffected by funding source, agency, or practice setting. Conclusions Lack of diversity in research funding among private practice surgeons may explain the reported discrepancies that currently exist between aesthetic and reconstructive surgery research.
Does Prior Breast Augmentation Affect Outcomes After Mastectomy With Reconstruction? An Analysis of Postoperative Complications and Reoperations
Background The purpose of this study is to evaluate how prior breast augmentation impacts rates of complications and risk for reoperation after mastectomy with concurrent breast reconstruction. Methods Patients undergoing nipple-sparing, skin-sparing, or simple mastectomy with implant-based reconstruction from 2008 to 2018 were identified in a prospective database. Postoperative complications and reoperations were then analyzed comparing patients with prior augmentation to patients without history of previous breast surgery. Results A total of 468 patients were identified with a median follow-up of 4 years. Of these, 72 had prior augmentation mammoplasty. These patients underwent nipple-sparing (52, 72%), skin-sparing (15, 21%), or simple (5, 7%) mastectomy with immediate direct-to-implant (46, 61%) or tissue expander (26, 35%) reconstruction. On univariate analysis, this cohort had a lower body mass index (23.3 vs 25.3, P = 0.003), a higher rate of nipple-sparing mastectomy (72% vs 54%, P = 0.01), and a higher prevalence of stage I disease (44% vs 33%, P = 0.04). Differences in age, comorbidities, reconstructive techniques, tumor size, and neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapies were not significant. Overall complication rate between patients with or without prior augmentation did not significantly differ (51% vs 50%, P = 0.83); no significant differences in rates of surgical site infection, hematoma, mastectomy skin flap/wound necrosis, nipple complications, implant loss, or capsular contracture were found. Analysis of reoperations between patients with and without prior augmentation revealed no significant differences in average number of subsequent planned, unplanned, or total reoperations. On multivariate analysis, prior breast augmentation was found to be associated with significantly increased risk for undergoing ≥1 unplanned reoperation (odds ratio, 2.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.28–4.05, P = 0.005). Conclusions Prior augmentation mammoplasty does not significantly affect rates of postoperative complications after mastectomy with concurrent reconstruction. Although prior augmentation does not affect number of subsequent reoperations on average, it does increase the risk of experiencing 1 or more unplanned reoperation after mastectomy with reconstruction.
Vascularized Lymph Node Transfer to the Thigh: A Novel Technical Modification
INTRODUCTION: As multidisciplinary treatment modalities for rectal cancer continue to evolve, neoadjuvant chemoradiation then surgical resection is a common approach. Robotic-assisted abdominoperineal resection is becoming more prevalent in part because of better visualization and instrument mobility within the pelvis. After abdominoperineal resection, postoperative perineal wound complications remain a significant risk. Pelvic reconstruction lowers this risk, and a pedicled rectus abdominis muscle flap is frequently used to achieve this. Traditional flap harvest requires laparotomy, resulting in violation of both rectus sheaths and a large midline scar. Robotic harvest of the rectus abdominis muscle for pelvic reconstruction after abdominoperineal resection is a novel approach with foreseeable benefits. TECHNIQUE: After completion of abdominoperineal resection, 2 additional trocars are inserted in the lateral abdomen, and the robot is reoriented toward the posterior abdominal wall. The peritoneum and posterior rectus sheath are incised, and dissection is carried superiorly and inferiorly in a sagittal plane to reveal the rectus abdominis muscle. The muscle body is separated from the anterior rectus sheath. Once the inferior epigastric artery is identified, the superior pole of the muscle is transected. Continued lateral dissection ensures flap mobility for placement within the pelvis. After obtaining proper reach, the robot is undocked, and the flap is sutured in place through the perineal defect. RESULTS: After trocar placement and robot repositioning, both the colorectal and plastic surgeons trade places at the console. Robotic flap harvest precludes the need for laparotomy. The anterior rectus sheath remains unviolated and the patient avoids an additional midline scar. The aforementioned benefits of robot-assisted abdominoperineal resection, namely increased visualization and maneuverability, were also found applicable when robotically harvesting this flap. CONCLUSIONS: This technique exemplifies an additional minimally invasive technique for patients pursuing abdominoperineal resection. With knowledge of this novel approach, surgeons can better tailor their operations to benefit the patient.
Gauging the efficacy of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer patients with known axillary disease
AbstractBackground and ObjectivesNeoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) for ER+ breast cancer can downstage primary tumors. We evaluated NET efficacy in node‐positive patients.MethodsNode‐positive patients undergoing NET for ER+ breast cancer from 2012 to 2019 were reviewed. Primary endpoints included rates of axillary lymphadenectomy (ALND), pathologic complete response (pCR), and final nodal staging.ResultsThirty‐nine patients were included. Before NET, all were clinically node‐positive (cN1 = 36, 94%; cN2 = 2, 5%; cN3 = 1, 3%; Stage II = 23, 59%, Stage III = 16, 41%). After NET, nine (23%) had clinically persistent axillary disease necessitating ALND. The remaining 30 (77%) underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Of these, 25 (83%) were SLNB+ on frozen section, undergoing immediate ALND. Five patients were negative on frozen section: one had a confirmed axillary pCR, and four had residual nodal disease on permanent pathology. One underwent delayed ALND, and for the remaining three patients, decision was made to forgo ALND. Final overall axillary staging was: N0 (pCR) = 1, 3%, pN1mic = 1, 3%, pN1 = 20, 51%, pN2 = 12, 30%, pN3 = 5, 13%; Stage II = 16, 41%, Stage III = 23, 59%.ConclusionsWhile NET is reported to downstage primary tumors, downstaging of the axilla was unsuccessful in the majority of patients.
Commentary on: Eye-Tracking Technology in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: A Systematic Review
A Newly Described, Highly Prevalent Arterial Pedicle Perfuses Both Gracilis and Profunda Artery Perforator Flap Tissues: An Angiographic Study of the Medial Thigh
Abstract Background Novel secondary flap options are paramount for patients who are not candidates for common reconstructive methods. The purpose of this study is to identify the prevalence of single arterial pedicle supplying both the gracilis muscle and medial thigh tissue carried in a profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap. Such a pedicle could allow the creation of a chimeric gracilis and PAP flap with a single-arterial anastomosis. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of 157 lower extremity computed tomography (CT) angiograms to assess the vasculature of the thigh soft tissues. Imaging evaluation was supervised by a board-certified musculoskeletal radiologist. Results Prevalence of a single-arterial pedicle to a gracilis and PAP flap in each patient was 59% (31% within the right leg and 28% in the left leg). Furthermore, 16% of patients had a common arterial pedicle in both lower extremities. Conclusion Existence of a single-arterial pedicle to both the gracilis muscle and PAP flap tissues is frequently present in most patients in at least one lower extremity. This chimeric flap configuration could serve as a reconstructive avenue for patients, particularly those who have exhausted other more common flap options. Screening angiography is warranted in patients looking for this anatomic variation to establish its presence.