Quality of life,pain of prepectoral and subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with a discussion on cost: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionPrepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (PIBR) has regained popularity, despite decades-long preference for subpectoral implant placement. This paper aims to compare patient-reported outcomes (PRO) between prepectoral and subpectoral approaches to implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). The primary PRO was with the BREAST-Q, and postoperative pain scores, while the secondary outcomes were complication rates.MethodsA comprehensive literature search of the PubMed library was performed. All studies on patients undergoing IBBR after mastectomy that compared prepectoral to subpectoral placement and PROM or postoperative pain were included.ResultsA total of 3789 unique studies of which 7 publications with 216 and 332 patients who received prepectoral and subpectoral implants, respectively, were included for meta-analysis.Patients with prepectoral implant placement had significantly higher satisfaction with the outcome (p = 0.03) and psychosocial well-being (p = 0.03) module scores. The pain was lower in patients with prepectoral implants on postoperative day 1 (p<0.01) and day 7 (p<0.01). The subgroup analysis of prepectoral breast implants showed that complete acellular dermal matrix coverage had lower rates of wound dehiscence (p<0.0001), but there were no significant differences in complications between one-stage and two-stage procedures.ConclusionOverall, patients with prepectoral implants reported higher BREAST-Q scores and lower postoperative pain and lower complications rates than patients with subpectoral implants. In appropriately selected patients, prepectoral implant placement with ADM coverage, be it the primary placement of an implant or placement of a tissue expander before definitive implant placement, should be the modality of choice in patients who choose IBBR. Further research should focus on patient selection, strategies to reduce cost and cost-benefit analysis of PIBR.     

Risk of breast implant removal after one- versus two-stage breast reconstructive surgery

BackgroundTo date, both one- and two-stage techniques are used in immediate ‘implant-based breast reconstruction’ (IBBR) after mastectomy. Because it is still unknown what technique offers the best clinical outcomes, a multicenter retrospective study was conducted to compare both breast reconstruction techniques.MethodsAll patients, who underwent a mastectomy followed by immediate one- or two-stage IBBR during 2010 - 2016 were included. Our primary outcome measure was explantation of the ‘tissue expander’ (TE) and/ or implants within 60 days after breast reconstruction. Secondary outcomes were overall complication rate and secondary corrections.FindingsAmong a total of 383 women, TE/ implant explantation rate was higher in one-stage (19.9%) than in two-stage (11.3%) treated patients (p = 0.082). Overall complication rate (35.7% and 19.9% respectively, p = 0.008) and secondary corrections (29.8% and 20.3% respectively, p = 0.156) were also higher in one-stage compared to two-stage IBBR respectively. However, explantation (OR = 1.55; 95%CI = 0.67-3.58, p = 0.301) and complication (OR = 1.85; 95%CI = 0.92-3.37, p = 0.084) rates were comparable in one- and two-stage IBBR in our stratified multivariate logistic regression analyses, when controlling for history of smoking, nipple-sparing mastectomy, neoadjuvant radiation therapy, and removed breast tissue weight. A remarkable outcome in this study is that women treated with prophylactic surgery were more likely to have an explantation of the TE/ implant after a one-stage IBBR (OR = 4.49; 95%CI = 1.10-18.3, p = 0.037) than two-stage IBBR. In contrast, no association between type of IBBR and risk of TE/implants removal was found among women with a therapeutic mastectomy (OR = 0.82; 95%CI = 0.24-2.79, p =  = 0.74).ConclusionOne- and two-stage IBBR showed a comparable explantation and complication rate in our retrospective study. In one-stage IBBR more secondary corrections were detected. In addition, women who have to decide on a prophylactic mastectomy should be aware of a significantly higher risk of explantation of their implant after one-stage IBBR.     

Human Acellular Dermal Matrix (Epiflex®) in Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Skin- and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Treatment of Capsular Fibrosis: Results of a Multicenter,Prospective, Observational NOGGO-AWOGyn Study

BackgroundOver the last decades, the number of acellular dermal matrix (ADM)-assisted implant-based breast reconstructions (IBBR) has substantially increased. However, there is still a lack of prospective data on complication rates.MethodsWe performed a non-interventional, multicenter, prospective cohort study to evaluate complication rates of a human ADM in patients undergoing an IBBR after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomies. Patients with primary reconstruction (cohort A) and patients undergoing a secondary reconstruction after capsular fibrosis (cohort B) using the human ADM Epiflex® (DIZG gGmbH, Berlin, Germany) were enrolled in this study. Patients were followed-up for 12 months after surgery.ResultsEighty-four eligible patients were included in this study of whom 28 women underwent a bilateral breast reconstruction, leading to 112 human ADM-assisted reconstructions in total (cohort A: 73, cohort B: 39). In 33.0% of the reconstructed breasts at least one of the complications of primary interest occurred, including implant loss 7.1%, seroma 15.2%; infection 5.4%, rash 8.0%, and Baker grade III/IV capsular fibrosis 2.7%, with no statistically significant differences between the cohorts. Previous radiation therapy was significantly associated with occurrence of any postoperative complication (OR 20.41; p value 0.027).ConclusionThe rates of most complications were comparable to the rates reported for other ADMs with relatively low rates of capsular fibrosis and infections. The rate of seroma was increased in our study. Prior radiation therapy increased the risk of any postoperative complications. Therefore, the use of ADM in these patients should be considered carefully.     

Long-term outcomes of bilateral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction in women at high breast cancer risk

Introduction: Challenges of direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (BR) are to achieve sufficient implant coverage and lower pole projection. We assessed reoperation rates, long-term patient satisfaction and aesthetic outcome after direct-to-implant BR without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in women with high breast cancer risk.

Methods: Women who underwent bilateral skin or nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate direct-to-implant BR between 1994 and 2006 completed a survey on reoperations and the Breast-Q Reconstruction questionnaire. Photographs taken during follow-up were rated for long-term aesthetic outcome (scale 1–10) by five plastic surgeons. Outcomes were compared between women who never underwent unanticipated reoperations after immediate BR and women who underwent one or more reoperations, adjusted for potential confounders using multivariable linear regression.

Results: Of 143 women, 70 (49%) were never reoperated and 73 (51%) had undergone reoperations. Median follow-up was 12?years in both groups (range 7–17 and 6–19?years, respectively). Baseline characteristics were comparable except for history of prophylactic oophorectomy with 81% in the no-reoperations group versus 66% in the reoperated group (p?=?.03). Breast-Q scores were 59.7?±?17.3 versus 58.0?±?17.8 (p?=?.67) for ‘satisfaction with breasts’ and 71.1?±?20.3 versus 68.1?±?22.9 (p?=?.47) for ‘satisfaction with outcome’ in the no-reoperation versus reoperation group, respectively. Aesthetic outcome was scored 5.8?±?1.1 in the no-reoperation group versus 5.3?±?1.3 in the reoperation group (p?=?.01).

Conclusions: The single-stage intent did not prevent unanticipated surgical reinterventions in 51% of the patients. Long-term patient satisfaction was reasonable and not affected by reoperations. Aesthetic outcome, however, was only poor to reasonable and scores were significantly lower in the reoperated group.     

Laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective study

Objective: Necrosis in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction is a feared complication. Accurate evaluation of mastectomy skin flaps per-operatively is necessary to decrease this risk. The present study is the first in Scandinavia to review the effects of perioperative evaluation with laser-assisted indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (LA-ICGA).

Method: A retrospective review was performed using data from the electronic patient record at the Department of Plastic and Breast Surgery at Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark on all patients who underwent implant-based skin-sparing immediate breast reconstruction with ADM in the time period March 2012 to October 2015. A total of 92 patients undergoing 128 breasts reconstructions were included in the study. An evaluation of complications before and after the implementation of LA-ICGA was performed.

Results: No significant difference in necrosis rates requiring surgical revision (p?=?.411) or conservative treatment (p?=?.149) in patients undergoing implant-based immediate breast reconstruction were found.

Conclusion: Our results differ from previously published studies in that no beneficial effect on necrosis rates of was found after implementing LA-ICGA, possibly due to our limited sample size.     

Improved patient-reported outcomes after autologous fat transplantation and corrective surgery after breast surgery

Background: Autologous fat transplantation (AFT) is being increasingly used to improve the results after breast-conserving surgery and breast reconstruction. However, studies on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after AFT are scarce. The aim of this prospective longitudinal case-series study was to assess PRO in women who had undergone AFT after surgery for breast cancer or risk-reducing mastectomy.

Methods: Fifty women, who had undergone breast-conserving surgery or breast reconstruction, needing corrective surgery, were consecutively included between 2008 and 2013. A 20-item study-specific questionnaire (SSQ) and the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were used pre-operatively and 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operatively, to evaluate PRO and HRQoL.

Results: The patients underwent three (1–4) AFT procedures, with the injection of 164?ml (median) (range 40–516) fat. Thirty-eight and 34 patients completed the study-specific questionnaire and the SF-36, respectively, both pre-operatively and after 2 years. Sixteen of the 20 items in the SSQ were improved after 2 years, including breast size (p?p?p?p?=?0.001), pain in the region (p?=?0.005), scarring from previous breast surgery (p?p?Conclusions: AFT alone or in combination with other corrective surgical procedures, improved PRO after breast-conserving surgery and breast reconstruction in both irradiated and non-irradiated women.     

Positive effects of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in DIEP flap breast reconstruction

BackgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery protocols are successfully implemented in different surgical specialties, but a specific protocol for autologous breast reconstruction is missing. The aim of this study was to determine whether an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol contributes to a reduced length of stay without an increase in postoperative complications for patients undergoing a DIEP flap breast reconstruction.Materials en methodsThe effect of the ERAS protocol was examined using a single-center patient-control study comparing two groups of patients. Patients who underwent surgery between November 2017 and November 2018 using the ERAS protocol were compared with a historical control group (pre-ERAS) who underwent surgery between November 2016 and November 2017. The primary outcome measure was hospital length of stay. Secondary outcome measures were postoperative pain and postoperative complications.Results152 patients were included (ERAS group, n = 73; control group, n = 79). Mean hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the ERAS group than in the control group (5 vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). The average pain score was 1.73 in de the ERAS group compared to 2.17 in the control group (p = 0.032). There were no significant differences between the groups in postoperative complications. The ERAS group experienced less constipation (41 vs. 25 patients, p = 0.028).ConclusionAn enhanced recovery after surgery protocol contributes an accelerated postoperative recovery of patients undergoing a DIEP flap breast reconstruction. In this study a significant decrease was found in hospital length of stay, patient-reported pain score and adverse health issues.     

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Aesthetic Results after Immediate Breast Reconstruction Using Human Acellular Dermal Matrices: Results of a Multicenter,Prospective, Observational NOGGO-AWOGyn Study

BackgroundWith the increased use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) in implant-based breast reconstructions (IBBRs), the evaluation of patient-reported outcomes becomes more important.MethodsPatients who underwent an immediate human ADM-assisted, submuscular IBBR were included in this noninterventional, multicenter, prospective cohort study. Patients with primary reconstruction (cohort A) and patients with a revision surgery after capsular fibrosis (cohort B) were followed up for 12 months after surgery. Quality of life (EORTC BR-23) and patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (1 [“very satisfied”] to 6 [“not satisfied”]) with the outcome and the aesthetic result evaluated by 2 independent, external experts were assessed.ResultsEighty-four patients were enrolled in the study. The mean patient satisfaction score was 2.1 ± 0.8, with higher satisfaction in cohort B (p = 0.041). The score did not change significantly during the follow-up (p = 0.479). The mean satisfaction score of the surgeons was 2.0 ± 0.7; it was also higher in cohort B (p = 0.016) and showed no changes over time (p = 0.473). The mean aesthetic result was 2.2 ± 0.7. 92.9% of the patients completed at least 1 quality of life questionnaire. Body image and sexual functioning increased during follow-up. One year after surgery, the mean scores were 77.2 ± 22.5 and 44.7 ± 27.3, respectively.ConclusionThe level of satisfaction among patients and surgeons and the score of the aesthetic result were constantly high among patients after ADM-assisted IBBR. Higher satisfaction scores could be observed after revision surgery caused by capsular fibrosis (cohort B) compared to primary reconstruction (cohort A). Quality of life increased during the first year after surgery.     

Blood loss and duration of surgery are independent risk factors for complications after breast reconstruction

Background: Complications after breast reconstructive surgery are common, and they can be caused by a wide range of factors. The aim of the present study was to identify independent perioperative risk factors for postoperative complications after breast reconstruction.

Methods: A retrospective study was performed of 623 consecutive breast cancer patients who had undergone deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap, latissimus dorsi (LD) flap, lateral thoracodorsal flap (LTDF), or tissue expander with secondary implant (EXP). Data on demography, perioperative parameters, and complications were collected. Logistic regression models adjusted to the reconstruction method and to confounding demographic factors were used for statistical analysis.

Results: Increased blood loss for each 10-ml step increased the risk for overall early complications (p?=?0.017), early seroma (p?=?0.037), early resurgery (p?=?0.010), late local overall complications (p?=?0.024), and late fat necrosis (p?=?0.031). Longer duration of surgery for each 10-minute step increased the risk of overall early complications (p?=?0.019), but, in the univariate model, there was an increased risk for nine different types of complications (p?=?0.004–0.029). There was no association between the experience of the surgeon performing the procedure and the frequency of complications.

Conclusions: Duration of surgery and blood loss during surgery are independent risk factors for postoperative complications, and should be minimised. Further research is needed to establish the association between the experience of the surgeon and the occurrence of complications.     

Worse patient-reported outcome after lateral approach than after anterior and posterolateral approach in primary hip arthroplasty

Background — The surgical approach in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is often based on surgeon preference and local traditions. The anterior muscle-sparing approach has recently gained popularity in Europe. We tested the hypothesis that patient satisfaction, pain, function, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after THA is not related to the surgical approach.

Patients — 1,476 patients identified through the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register were sent questionnaires 1–3 years after undergoing THA in the period from January 2008 to June 2010. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) included the hip disability osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), visual analog scales (VAS) addressing pain and satisfaction, and questions about complications. 1,273 patients completed the questionnaires and were included in the analysis.

Results — Adjusted HOOS scores for pain, other symptoms, activities of daily living (ADL), sport/recreation, and quality of life were significantly worse (p < 0.001 to p = 0.03) for the lateral approach than for the anterior approach and the posterolateral approach (mean differences: 3.2–5.0). These results were related to more patient-reported limping with the lateral approach than with the anterior and posterolateral approaches (25% vs. 12% and 13%, respectively; p < 0.001).

Interpretation — Patients operated with the lateral approach reported worse outcomes 1–3 years after THA surgery. Self-reported limping occurred twice as often in patients who underwent THA with a lateral approach than in those who underwent THA with an anterior or posterolateral approach. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes after THA between those who underwent THA with a posterolateral approach and those who underwent THA with an anterior approach.     

Variation in the provision and practice of implant-based breast reconstruction in the UK: Results from the iBRA national practice questionnaire

IntroductionThe introduction of biological and synthetic meshes has revolutionised the practice of implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) but evidence for effectiveness is lacking. The iBRA (implant Breast Reconstruction evAluation) study is a national trainee-led project that aims to explore the practice and outcomes of IBBR to inform the design of a future trial. We report the results of the iBRA National Practice Questionnaire (NPQ) which aimed to comprehensively describe the provision and practice of IBBR across the UK.MethodsA questionnaire investigating local practice and service provision of IBBR developed by the iBRA Steering Group was completed by trainee and consultant leads at breast and plastic surgical units across the UK. Summary data for each survey item were calculated and variation between centres and overall provision of care examined.Results81 units within 79 NHS-hospitals completed the questionnaire. Units offered a range of reconstructive techniques, with IBBR accounting for 70% (IQR:50–80%) of participating units' immediate procedures. Units on average were staffed by 2.5 breast surgeons (IQR:2.0–3.0) and 2.0 plastic surgeons (IQR:1.0–3.0) performing 35 IBBR cases per year (IQR:20-50). Variation was demonstrated in the provision of novel different techniques for IBBR especially the use of biological (n = 62) and synthetic (n = 25) meshes and in patient selection for these procedures.ConclusionsThe iBRA-NPQ has demonstrated marked variation in the provision and practice of IBBR in the UK. The prospective audit phase of the iBRA study will determine the safety and effectiveness of different approaches to IBBR and allow evidence-based best practice to be explored.     

Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: clinical outcomes and risk factors related complications

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes and risk factors related complications in patients who had undergone nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) followed by implant-based or autologous reconstruction.

Methods: Between 2004–2014 a single-institution retrospective review was collected on NSMs reconstruction. Patient demographics, comorbidities, breast morphological factors, type and timing of radiotherapy, type of incision, reconstruction type and timing, implant volume and complications were collected.

Results: A total of 288 patients had undergone 369 NSMs, 81 (28.1%) of which were bilateral while 207 (71.9%) unilateral. One-hundred mastectomies were performed for prophylactic purposes whereas 269 were therapeutics. Thirteen (4.5%) patients were active smokers, while 2 (0.7%) were diabetics. Fifty-five breasts (14.9%) were previously irradiated and average time elapsed between radiotherapy and NSM was 9-year, (range, 5–15 yrs). Total complication rate was 13.5% at mean follow-up of 47.98?months (range, 6–114?months). Partial-thickness and full-thickness mastectomy skin flap and NAC necrosis occurred in 39 (78%) and in 10 (20%) breasts, respectively. Previous radiotherapy and implant volume were significant predictors of complications (OR: 10.14, 95% CI: 3.99–27.01; OR?×?100?g: 3.13, 95% CI: 1.64–6.33). Overall mastectomy type incision was not predictive of complications (p?=?.426). No association was observed between radiotherapy and mastectomy type access (p?=?.349).

Conclusions: From our experience NSM followed by implant-based and autologous reconstruction had a relative high rate of complications comparable to previous reports. Despite this, it should be carefully offered to patients in whom potential risk factors are identified.     

Immediate breast reconstruction after salvage mastectomy: Case control outcome comparisons of DIEP flap and DTI reconstruction

BackgroundCancer recurrence after breast-conserving therapy is most often managed by salvage mastectomy. Successful breast reconstruction immediately after salvage mastectomy, however, remains challenging because the reconstruction is performed on previously irradiated breast tissue.MethodsRecords of patients who underwent breast reconstruction from June 2010 to June 2019 were reviewed, including their demographic characteristics, methods of breast reconstruction, and early and late outcomes. Deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps and direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstructions following salvage mastectomies were compared with reconstructions following completion or primary mastectomies. Patients who underwent reconstruction followed by postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) and patients followed up for less than 6 months were excluded.ResultsDIEP flaps in 27 breasts that underwent salvage mastectomy were compared with DIEP flaps in 32 breasts that underwent completion and 564 that underwent primary mastectomy. Rates of early complications, including microsurgical revision and total flap loss, and of late complications (>6 months after surgery), including fat necrosis and flap volume loss, did not differ significantly. DTI reconstruction in 20 breasts that underwent salvage mastectomy was compared with DTI reconstruction in 12 breasts that underwent completion and 351 that underwent primary mastectomy. Wound healing problems, including wound dehiscence and delayed wound healing (15% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.0022), and capsular contracture (30% vs. 5.4%, P = 0.0000), were significantly more frequent in breasts that underwent salvage than primary mastectomy.ConclusionsDIEP flap is a successful reconstruction option after salvage mastectomy. DTI reconstruction is associated with higher rates of wound healing problems and capsular contracture after salvage than after primary mastectomy.     

Lack of association between breast reconstructive surgery and the development of chronic pain after mastectomy: A propensity matched retrospective cohort analysis

ObjectivesTo compare if mastectomy with reconstructive surgery had greater incidence of chronic pain compared to mastectomy surgery alone.Materials and methodsThe study was a retrospective cohort. Patients who underwent mastectomies with and without reconstruction responded to the modified short form Brief Pain Inventory and the short form McGill pain questionnaire to identify and characterize pain at least 6 months after the surgical procedure. Propensity matching analysis was used to control for covariates differences in the study groups.Results310 subjects were included and 132 patients (43%) reported the presence of chronic pain. After propensity score matching to adjust for covariate imbalances, the incidence of chronic pain in the mastectomy group who had additional surgery for breast reconstruction was not different compared to the group who had mastectomy surgery alone, 26 out of 68 (38%) and 27 out of 68 (39%), respectively P = 1.0. Among patients who had chronic pain, breast reconstruction did not increase the intensity of worst pain in the last 24 h, median (IQR) of 2 (1–5) compared to 4 (1–5) in the no reconstruction group, P = 0.41. Type of reconstruction (breast implants vs. flap tissue) did not result in greater incidence and/or intensity of chronic pain.ConclusionsBreast reconstruction after mastectomy does not result in a greater incidence of chronic pain compared to mastectomy alone. Female patients undergoing breast cancer surgery should not incorporate chronic pain in their decision to undergo reconstructive surgery after mastectomy.     

Reconstrucción mamaria inmediata mediante implante prepectoral de poliuretano. Resultados preliminares del estudio prospectivo PreQ-20

IntroductionIn recent years, mastectomy and reconstruction techniques have evolved towards less aggressive procedures, improving the satisfaction and quality of life of women. For this reason, mastectomy has become a valid option for both women with breast cancer and high-risk women. The objective of this study is to analyze the safety of mastectomy and immediate prepectoral reconstruction with polyurethane implant in women with breast cancer and risk reduction.MethodObservational prospective study to evaluate the feasibility and safety of immediate reconstruction using prepectoral polyurethane implant. All women (with breast cancer or high risk for breast cancer) who underwent skin-sparing or skin-and-nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with a prepectoral polyurethane implant were included. Women with breast sarcomas, disease progression during primary systemic therapy, delayed, autologous or retropectoral reconstruction, and those who did not wish to participate in the study were excluded. Surgical procedures were performed by both senior and junior surgeons. All patients received the corresponding complementary treatments. All adverse events that occurred during follow-up and the risk factors for developing them were analyzed.Results159 reconstructions were performed in 102 women, 80.4% due to breast carcinoma. Fourteen patients developed complications, the most frequent being seroma and wound dehiscence. Eight women required a reoperation (5.0%), seven of them due to implant exposure. Four reconstructions (2.5%) resulted in loss of the implant. Three patients progressed from their oncological process: a local relapse in the mastectomy flap, an axillary progression and a systemic progression.ConclusionsPrepectoral reconstruction with a polyurethane implant is a procedure with a low incidence of postoperative complications (8.8%) and implant loss (2.5%). Its use is safe with perioperative cancer treatments (neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy).     

Incisional Hernia Repair of Medium- and Large-Sized Defects: Laparoscopic IPOM Versus Open SUBLAY Technique

Background: Small incisional hernias can be repaired laparoscopically with low morbidity and reasonable recurrence rates. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic with open technique in medium- and large-sized defects regarding postoperative complications and recurrence rates.

Methods: Between 2012 and 2016, 102 patients with medium- or large-sized defects according to EHS classification underwent incisional hernia repair. Patients’ characteristics, hernia size and postoperative complications were prospectively recorded. In October 2016, eligible patients were assessed for recurrence.

Results: About 31 patients underwent laparoscopic IPOM and 71 patients open SUBLAY repair. Morbidity rate was significantly lower in IPOM group than in SUBLAY group (19% versus 41%; p?=?.028). Postoperative complications according to Clavien–Dindo classification were significantly lower in the IPOM group (p?=?.021). Duration of surgery (88 versus 114?min; p?=?.009) and length of hospital stay (five versus eight days; p?<?.001) were significantly shorter for IPOM than for SUBLAY. 71 patients were available for follow-up. Recurrence rates showed no significant difference between study groups (13% versus 7%, p?=?.508).

Conclusions: Laparoscopic repair in medium- and large-sized defects is a feasible and safe approach. IPOM compared to SUBLAY significantly reduces postoperative complications and hospital stay; recurrence rates are comparable.     

No difference in postoperative complications,pain, and functional outcomes up to 2 years after incidental durotomy in lumbar spinal fusion: a prospective,multi-institutional,propensity-matched analysis of 1,741 patients

BackgroundIncidental durotomies occur in up to 17% of spinal operations. Controversy exists regarding the short- and long-term consequences of durotomies.PurposeThe primary aim of this study was to assess the effect of incidental durotomies on the immediate postoperative complications and patient-reported outcome measures.Study designProspective study.Patient sampleA total of 1,741 patients undergoing index lumbar spine fusion were selected from a multi-institutional prospective data registry.Outcome measuresPatient-reported outcome measures used in this study included back pain (BP-Visual Analog Scale), leg pain (LP-Visual Analog Scale), and Oswestry Disability Index.MethodsA total of 1,741 patients were selected from a multi-institutional prospective data registry, who underwent primary lumbar fusion for low back pain and/or radiculopathy between January 2003 and December 2010. We collected and analyzed data on patient demographics, postoperative complications, back pain, leg pain, and functional disability over 2 years, with risk-adjusted propensity score modeling.ResultsIncidental durotomies occurred in 70 patients (4%). Compared with the control group (n=1,671), there was no significant difference in postoperative infection (p=.32), need for reoperation (p=.85), or symptomatic neurologic damage (p=.66). At 1- and 2-year follow-up, there was no difference in patient-reported outcomes of back pain (BP-Visual Analog Scale), leg pain (LP-Visual Analog Scale), or functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index) (p>.3), with results remaining consistent in the propensity-matched cohort analysis (p>.4).ConclusionWithin the context of an on-going debate on the consequences of incidental durotomy, we found no difference in neurologic symptoms, infection, reoperation, back pain, leg pain, or functional disability over a 2-year follow-up period.     

A Prospective Longitudinal Study of Cosmetic Outcome in Immediate Latissimus Dorsi Breast Reconstruction and the Influence of Radiotherapy

Background Immediate breast reconstruction may result in superior cosmetic outcomes as a result of the preservation of the skin envelope. The impact of implant use and radiotherapy (RT) on the cosmetic outcome of latissimus dorsi (LD) breast reconstruction, however, has never been prospectively evaluated with adequate long-term follow-up. Methods Women undergoing immediate LD breast reconstruction from January 2000 to February 2007 underwent photographic assessment and clinical evaluation for breast retraction analysis (BRA) at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively and on the anniversary of their surgery. The resulting photographs were subject to panel cosmetic assessment. A patient-reported cosmetic outcome questionnaire and the body image scale (BIS) were administered to each woman at a single time point to coincide with the anniversary of their surgery. Multilevel linear regression modelling was used to analyse the results. Results Seventy-three women underwent 53 implant-assisted LD breast reconstructions and 20 autologous procedures with a mean follow-up of 2.71 years. The incidence of radiotherapy in this cohort was 43%. RT over time adversely influenced overall cosmetic outcome as assessed by the panel (P = 0.0002), and BRA (P = 0.033), both of which were significantly worse in the implant-assisted group (P = 0.020). Patient reporting of overall cosmetic outcome and BIS, however, did not differ significantly between the LD groups or following RT. Conclusion Radiotherapy may adversely affect the cosmetic outcome of latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction, particularly if an implant is used, but this is not universal. Patient assessment of their cosmetic outcome may, however, differ significantly from the clinician’s view. Financial support: Allergan Medical UK, United Bristol Healthcare Trust Charitable Trustees     

One stage placement of permanent implant compared to two stage tissue expander reconstruction

With the advent of the skin sparing mastectomy, immediate breast reconstruction with placement of the definitive prosthesis at the time of mastectomy is possible. The question remains: does single-stage prosthetic reconstruction result in greater numbers of complications or rates of re-operation, compared to two-stage tissue expander reconstruction? A retrospective cohort study of a single centre?s experience with these techniques was carried out. From 2004 to 2012, 54 cases of immediate breast reconstruction with implant were identified, and 108 cases of immediate breast reconstruction using a tissue expander were identified. Gathered preoperative data included tumour, prior exposure to radiation, preoperative chemotherapy, smoking, and comorbidities. Complication rates, as well as the rate of secondary operations, were examined. There were no significant increased risks in the rate of post-operative complications (p?=?.910, odds ratio?=?0.9) nor in the rate of re-operation (p?=?0.421, odds ratio?=?1.4) associated with the insertion of a definitive prosthesis at the time of skin sparing mastectomy. However, previously radiated breasts experienced a 100% rate of wound complications in our subset of 9 breasts that underwent one stage breast reconstruction with immediate final prosthesis placement. Our study suggests that patients with early stage disease can undergo single stage breast reconstruction without increased risk of complications nor need for secondary operations. While the mean time to completion of the reconstructive process is shortened by 5 months with the single stage technique, implant based breast reconstruction requires careful counseling and patient selection in radiated patients.