Elswick, Sarah M.

Background: Secondary lymphedema can be a lifelong and debilitating consequence of lower extremity oncologic resection and reconstruction. The goal of this study was to identify risk factors for the development of lymphedema in patients treated for thigh sarcoma. Methods: A retrospective review analyzed all patients who underwent thigh sarcoma resection and reconstruction by a plastic surgeon at the Mayo Clinic between 1997 and 2014. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical management, adjunctive therapies, and complications of patients who did and did not develop postoperative lymphedema were compared. Results: A total of 148 patients were identified. Twelve percent of patients developed lymphedema postoperatively during an average follow-up of 26 months. Risk factors for the development of lymphedema included defect location in the medial thigh ( P = 0.04), arterial resection ( P = 0.001), arterial reconstruction ( P = 0.027), and a history of cardiac disease ( P = 0.03). Twenty-two percent of patients who developed lymphedema also experienced wound dehiscence compared with 4.6% of patients without lymphedema ( P = 0.02). There were no differences in age, body mass index, smoking, history of deep venous thrombosis or venous stasis, wound dimensions, or type of reconstruction performed in patients with and without lymphedema. Conclusions: Lymphedema is common following major oncologic resection. Preexisting cardiac disease, tumor location in the medial thigh, and arterial resection and reconstruction were associated with a higher risk of postoperative lymphedema. Noninfectious wound dehiscence may be secondary to lymphedema or represent an early indicator of patients who will ultimately develop lymphedema.

AbstractBackground and ObjectivesStandard treatment for extremity sarcoma is limb‐sparing surgery often with radiation, but complications occur frequently. We sought to determine factors predictive of wound complications after thigh sarcoma resection and reconstruction while analyzing trends over time.MethodsWe reviewed all thigh defects requiring plastic surgeon reconstruction following sarcoma resection at our institution from 1997 to 2014. Patient demographics, comorbidities, operative characteristics, multi‐modality therapies, and complications were analyzed. Wound complications were: infection, dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, or partial/total flap loss.ResultsThere were 159 thigh reconstructions followed for 30 months on average. Eighty‐seven percent of patients underwent radiation and 42% had chemotherapy. Almost half (49.1%) had a complication. The most common wound complication was surgical site infection (23.3%) followed by dehiscence (19.5%), and seroma (10.7%). Less common were partial (2.5%) or total flap loss (0.6%). Reoperation was required in 21 patients (13.2%). Tobacco use, older patient age, cardiac disease, and higher body mass index were independently associated with wound complications. Complications trended towards decreasing over time, but this was not statistically significant.ConclusionsTobacco use, cardiac disease, and higher body mass index, but not the timing of reconstruction, appear to increase the risk of wound complications after thigh soft tissue sarcomas resection and plastic surgery reconstruction.

AbstractThe anatomic variation in the branching pattern of the popliteal vessel has been well‐established. Little has been written in the literature regarding recipient vessel selection for microvascular reconstruction in the lower extremity as it pertains to aberrant vascular anatomy. We present the case of a 57‐year‐old male patient who sustained a closed right lower extremity pilon fracture in a motor vehicle accident. The patient was initially treated with external fixation, which was followed by definitive open reduction and internal fixation 3 weeks later. Over the next 2 weeks, the patient developed skin ischemia of the anterior ankle. A free‐tissue transfer was planned. A digital subtraction angiogram revealed absence of the posterior tibial (PT) vessels and an aberrant course of the peroneal (PR) artery. In the operating room, the medial distal leg was explored for the PT vessels, which were severely hypoplastic. Given the close proximity of the PR vessels, the dissection was extended proximally to assess these vessels for microvascular anastomosis. They were found to be suitable. A parascapular flap was harvested and transferred to the right leg wound without any significant stretch on the vessels for soft tissue coverage. The flap demonstrated excellent inflow and outflow, and the leg and foot remained well perfused. The patient's postoperative course was uncomplicated. The technique of exposing the peroneal vessels for microvascular anastomosis via a medial approach is described. This technique is an excellent option to have available when aberrant anatomy precludes the use more commonly utilized vessels.

Background: Two-stage subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction is the most common method for breast reconstruction. Recent advances in surgical techniques and technology have made prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction feasible. There are limited data on outcomes after prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation therapy. Methods: A retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing immediate two-stage prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with postmastectomy radiation therapy was performed. Outcomes of irradiated breasts were compared with nonirradiated breasts in bilateral cases. Results: Ninety-three cases of prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction in 54 women who underwent immediate two-stage reconstruction (39 bilateral and 15 unilateral) and unilateral postmastectomy radiation therapy were identified. Mean follow-up was 19 months from mastectomy and tissue expander reconstruction and 9 months from implant placement. Crude complication rates in irradiated versus nonirradiated sides were as follows: surgical-site infection, 18.5 percent versus 7.7 percent; seroma, 5.6 percent versus 5.1 percent; mastectomy skin flap necrosis, 1.9 percent versus 2.6 percent; wound dehiscence, 1.9 percent versus 7.7 percent; capsular contracture, 1.9 percent versus 0 percent; hematoma, 1.9 percent versus 2.6 percent; and extrusion, 1.9 percent versus 0 percent. On univariate analysis, there were no risk factors associated with any complication, including radiation therapy, surgical-site infection, unplanned readmissions, and unplanned return to the operating room. To date, reconstruction has been completed in 96 percent of patients, with successful implant-based breast reconstruction in 81 breasts (45 irradiated breasts and 36 nonirradiated breasts). Conclusions: Early data of prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction in patients with postmastectomy radiation therapy show promising results. Postmastectomy radiation therapy should not be an absolute contraindication to prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.