Citations

60 Background: Indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with immediate reconstruction have expanded. For cancer patients, NSM is thought best-suited for early stage patients, with nodal involvement initially viewed as a relative contraindication. We undertook this study to evaluate the use and early outcomes of NSM in node-positive (LN+) breast cancer. Methods: We identified 240 cancers in 226 patients (14 bilateral) scheduled for NSM and operated on at our institution 1/2009-6/2014. Data on intraoperative conversion from NSM, recurrence and follow-up was abstracted from the medical record. Chi-square and long-rank tests were used for statistical analysis. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant. Results: Of 240 cancers, 182 were LN- and 58 were LN+. More LN+ patients had T2/T3 tumors (27/58, 47%) than LN- patients (31/182, 17%), p < 0.0001, but ER and HER2 status was similar. Of 58 LN+ cases, 19 (33%) were cN1 confirmed by positive LN cytology and 39 (67%) were cN0 but LN+ at operation. 10 patients LN+ at diagnosis received neoadjuvant therapy (NT) followed by operation (at which 6 were pLN+ and 4 rendered ypN0); 39 cN0 (4 NT, 35 primary surgery) and 9 cN1 primary surgery patients were pLN+ at operation with a median of 1 LN+. NSM was successful in 13/14 LN+ NT patients (93%) and 39/44 LN+ primary surgery patients (89%), p = 0.64. Six LN+ patients (10%) were converted to skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) at initial operation based on frozen section pathology (n = 5) or at a second operation (n = 1) vs 13/182 LN- patients (7%), p = 0.44. Among cancer patients treated with NSM, 7 locoregional recurrences (5 in LN+, 2 in LN- patients) occurred at 25 mos median follow-up. 3-year locoregional disease-free estimates were 87% (95% CI 75-100%) for LN+ vs 99% (95% CI 97-100%) for LN- patients, p = 0.007. One nipple-areolar recurrence occurred, in a LN- patient. 3-year breast cancer-specific survival was 97% (95% CI 92-100%) in LN+ vs 99% (95% CI 98-100%) in LN- patients, p = 0.40. Conclusions: Conversion from planned NSM to SSM did not differ significantly between LN+ and LN- patients. Short-term oncologic outcomes were satisfactory. These data suggest that NSM may be appropriate for carefully selected LN+ breast cancer patients.

ObjectiveRhinoplasty, a surgical procedure that alters the shape or appearance of the nose while preserving or enhancing the nasal airway, ranks among the most commonly performed cosmetic procedures in the United States, with >200,000 procedures reported in 2014. While it is difficult to calculate the exact economic burden incurred by rhinoplasty patients following surgery with or without complications, the average rhinoplasty procedure typically exceeds $4000. The costs incurred due to complications, infections, or revision surgery may include the cost of long‐term antibiotics, hospitalization, or lost revenue from hours/days of missed work.The resultant psychological impact of rhinoplasty can also be significant. Furthermore, the health care burden from psychological pressures of nasal deformities/aesthetic shortcomings, surgical infections, surgical pain, side effects from antibiotics, and nasal packing materials must also be considered for these patients. Prior to this guideline, limited literature existed on standard care considerations for pre‐ and postsurgical management and for standard surgical practice to ensure optimal outcomes for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. The impetus for this guideline is to utilize current evidence‐based medicine practices and data to build unanimity regarding the peri‐ and postoperative strategies to maximize patient safety and to optimize surgical results for patients.PurposeThe primary purpose of this guideline is to provide evidence‐based recommendations for clinicians who either perform rhinoplasty or are involved in the care of a rhinoplasty candidate, as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The target audience is any clinician or individual, in any setting, involved in the management of these patients. The target patient population is all patients aged ≥15 years. The guideline is intended to focus on knowledge gaps, practice variations, and clinical concerns associated with this surgical procedure; it is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for improving nasal form and function after rhinoplasty. Recommendations in this guideline concerning education and counseling to the patient are also intended to include the caregiver if the patient is <18 years of age.Action StatementsThe Guideline Development Group made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should ask all patients seeking rhinoplasty about their motivations for surgery and their expectations for outcomes, should provide feedback on whether those expectations are a realistic goal of surgery, and should document this discussion in the medical record. (2) Clinicians should assess rhinoplasty candidates for comorbid conditions that could modify or contraindicate surgery, including obstructive sleep apnea, body dysmorphic disorder, bleeding disorders, or chronic use of topical vasoconstrictive intranasal drugs. (3) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, should evaluate the rhinoplasty candidate for nasal airway obstruction during the preoperative assessment. (4) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, should educate rhinoplasty candidates regarding what to expect after surgery, how surgery might affect the ability to breathe through the nose, potential complications of surgery, and the possible need for future nasal surgery. (5) The clinician, or the clinician’s designee, should counsel rhinoplasty candidates with documented obstructive sleep apnea about the impact of surgery on nasal airway obstruction and how obstructive sleep apnea might affect perioperative management. (6) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, should educate rhinoplasty patients before surgery about strategies to manage discomfort after surgery. (7) Clinicians should document patients’ satisfaction with their nasal appearance and with their nasal function at a minimum of 12 months after rhinoplasty.The Guideline Development Group made recommendations against certain actions: (1) When a surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, chooses to administer perioperative antibiotics for rhinoplasty, he or she should not routinely prescribe antibiotic therapy for a duration >24 hours after surgery. (2) Surgeons should not routinely place packing in the nasal cavity of rhinoplasty patients (with or without septoplasty) at the conclusion of surgery.The panel group made the following statement an option: (1) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, may administer perioperative systemic steroids to the rhinoplasty patient.

ObjectiveRhinoplasty, a surgical procedure that alters the shape or appearance of the nose while preserving or enhancing the nasal airway, ranks among the most commonly performed cosmetic procedures in the United States, with >200,000 procedures reported in 2014. While it is difficult to calculate the exact economic burden incurred by rhinoplasty patients following surgery with or without complications, the average rhinoplasty procedure typically exceeds $4000. The costs incurred due to complications, infections, or revision surgery may include the cost of long‐term antibiotics, hospitalization, or lost revenue from hours/days of missed work.The resultant psychological impact of rhinoplasty can also be significant. Furthermore, the health care burden from psychological pressures of nasal deformities/aesthetic shortcomings, surgical infections, surgical pain, side effects from antibiotics, and nasal packing materials must also be considered for these patients. Prior to this guideline, limited literature existed on standard care considerations for pre‐ and postsurgical management and for standard surgical practice to ensure optimal outcomes for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. The impetus for this guideline is to utilize current evidence‐based medicine practices and data to build unanimity regarding the peri‐ and postoperative strategies to maximize patient safety and to optimize surgical results for patients.PurposeThe primary purpose of this guideline executive summary is to provide evidence‐based recommendations for clinicians who either perform rhinoplasty or are involved in the care of a rhinoplasty candidate, as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The target audience is any clinician or individual, in any setting, involved in the management of these patients. The target patient population is all patients aged ≥15 years. The guideline is intended to focus on knowledge gaps, practice variations, and clinical concerns associated with this surgical procedure; it is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for improving nasal form and function after rhinoplasty. Recommendations in this guideline concerning education and counseling to the patient are intended to include the caregiver if the patient is <18 years of age.Action StatementsThe Guideline Development Group made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should ask all patients seeking rhinoplasty about their motivations for surgery and their expectations for outcomes, should provide feedback on whether those expectations are a realistic goal of surgery, and should document this discussion in the medical record. (2) Clinicians should assess rhinoplasty candidates for comorbid conditions that could modify or contraindicate surgery, including obstructive sleep apnea, body dysmorphic disorder, bleeding disorders, or chronic use of topical vasoconstrictive intranasal drugs. (3) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, should evaluate the rhinoplasty candidate for nasal airway obstruction during the preoperative assessment. (4) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, should educate rhinoplasty candidates regarding what to expect after surgery, how surgery might affect the ability to breathe through the nose, potential complications of surgery, and the possible need for future nasal surgery. (5) The clinician, or the clinician’s designee, should counsel rhinoplasty candidates with documented obstructive sleep apnea about the impact of surgery on nasal airway obstruction and how obstructive sleep apnea might affect perioperative management. (6) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, should educate rhinoplasty patients before surgery about strategies to manage discomfort after surgery. (7) Clinicians should document patient satisfaction with their nasal appearance and with their nasal function at a minimum of 12 months after rhinoplasty.The guideline development group made recommendations against certain actions: (1) When a surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, chooses to administer perioperative antibiotics for rhinoplasty, he or she should not routinely prescribe antibiotic therapy for a duration >24 hours after surgery. (2) Surgeons should not routinely place packing in the nasal cavity of rhinoplasty patients (with or without septoplasty) at the conclusion of surgery.The panel group made the following statement an option: (1) The surgeon, or the surgeon’s designee, may administer perioperative systemic steroids to the rhinoplasty patient.

Abstract BACKGROUND Patients recovering from decompressive laminectomy without fusion may require assistance with activities of daily living and physical/occupational therapy upon hospital discharge. OBJECTIVE To examine comorbidities and perioperative characteristics of patients undergoing lumbar decompression for associations with discharge status using a multicenter database. METHODS A multicenter database was used for this retrospective cohort analysis. Patients admitted from home with degenerative spine disease for lumbar decompression without fusion were included. Thirty-day outcomes and operative characteristics were compared as a function of patient discharge using chi-square and Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with discharge to a nonhome facility. RESULTS Of the 8627 patients included for analysis, 9.7% were discharged to a nonhome facility. On multivariable analysis, age (85+ vs <65, odds ratio [OR] 13.59), number of levels of decompression (3+ vs 1, OR 1.75), African American race vs Non-Hispanic or Hispanic White (OR 1.87), female vs male gender (OR 1.97), body mass index (BMI) (40+ vs 18.5-24.9, OR 1.74), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical classification status (4 vs 1 or 2, OR 2.35), hypertension (OR 1.29), dependent functional status (OR 3.92), diabetes (OR 1.47), smoking (OR 1.40), hematocrit (<35 vs 35+, OR 1.76), international normalized ratio (≥1.3 vs <1.3, OR 2.32), and operative time (3+ h vs <1 h, OR 5.34) were significantly associated with an increased odds of discharge to nonhome facilities. CONCLUSION Preoperative status and operative course variables can influence discharge disposition in lumbar decompression patients. Identifying specific factors that contribute to a greater likelihood of dismissal to skilled facility or rehabilitation unit can further inform both surgeons and patients during preoperative counseling and disposition planning.

Abstract Purpose: Little is known about the role of the immune system in the earliest stages of breast carcinogenesis. We studied quantitative differences in immune cell types between breast tissues from normal donors and those from women with benign breast disease (BBD). Experimental Design: A breast tissue matched case–control study was created from donors to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Tissue Bank (KTB) and from women diagnosed with BBD at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) who either subsequently developed cancer (BBD cases) or remained cancer-free (BBD controls). Serial tissue sections underwent immunostaining and digital quantification of cell number per mm2 for CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, CD20+ B cells, and CD68+ macrophages and quantification of positive pixel measure for CD11c (dendritic cells). Results: In 94 age-matched triplets, BBD lobules showed greater densities of CD8+ T cells, CD11c+ dendritic cells, CD20+ B cells, and CD68+ macrophages compared with KTB normals. Relative to BBD controls, BBD cases had lower CD20+ cell density (P = 0.04). Nearly 42% of BBD cases had no CD20+ B cells in evaluated lobules compared with 28% of BBD controls (P = 0.02). The absence of CD20+ cells versus the presence in all lobules showed an adjusted OR of 5.7 (95% confidence interval, 1.4–23.1) for subsequent breast cancer risk. Conclusions: Elevated infiltration of both innate and adaptive immune effectors in BBD tissues suggests an immunogenic microenvironment. The reduced B-cell infiltration in women with later breast cancer suggests a role for B cells in preventing disease progression and as a possible biomarker for breast cancer risk. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3945–52. ©2017 AACR.

Objectives: Investigations of pediatric critical illness typically focus on inpatient cohorts drawn from wide referral areas and diverse healthcare systems. Cohorts amenable to investigating the full spectrum of critical illness as it develops within a community have yet to be studied in the United States. Our objective was to provide the first epidemiologic report of the incidence and presentation of pediatric critical illness within a U.S. population-based birth cohort. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: A geographically defined community (Olmsted, MN) with medical record linkage across all health systems. All ICU services are provided within a single children’s hospital. Patients: A birth cohort of children (n =9,441) born 2003–2007 in Olmsted County, MN. Measurements and Main Results: During the study period, there were a total of 15,277 ICU admissions to Mayo Clinic Children’s Hospital. A total of 577 birth cohort children accounted for 824 of these admissions during the 61,770 person-years of follow-up accumulated. Incidence of first-time ICU admission was 9.3 admits per 1,000 person-years. Admission rates were highest in the first year of life and then declined steadily. Respiratory problems were among the most common reasons for admission at any age and diagnoses reflect changes in health risk factors as children grow and develop over time. After 1 year old, a majority of children admitted have preexisting chronic comorbidities and/or prior ICU stays. In-hospital mortality occurred exclusively in children admitted prior to 5 days of age (n = 4). Seven children died after hospital discharge. Conclusions: This is the first report characterizing critical illness within a population-based birth cohort of U.S. children. The results demonstrate the changing incidence, presentation, and healthcare requirements associated with critical illness across the developmental spectrum as a population of children ages.