Search

Publication in peer-reviewed journals is a duty and privilege. It is essential to the advancement of evidence-based medicine and often used as a proxy for academic achievement, contributing to decisions around promotion in academia. Within plastic surgery, authors have historically been male surgeons affiliated with academic institutions, lacking representation of women, private practice, medical students, and international collaboration. This study analyzes differences in authors' gender, practice affiliation, degree of education, and international collaboration in articles published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, which was chosen as the representative journal given its high impact factor (3.946) and consistent ranking as the number one journal in plastic surgery worldwide.A list of Breast, Cosmetic, and Hand/Peripheral Nerve articles published between 2006 and 2019 was compiled from the online archive of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Demographic author characteristics were recorded, and statistical analyses were performed to identify trends over time.A total of 2688 articles were analyzed. The proportion of articles written by female authors in the Breast category, authors in private practice with academic affiliation in the Cosmetic section, and U.S. collaboration with other countries increased over time (p = 0.038, p = 0.029, p0.001, respectively). First authors with bachelor's, master's, and doctorate degrees have also been contributing increasingly.This analysis revealed increasing demographic heterogeneity of authors in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery over time, with increasing contributions from women, surgeons in private practice with academic affiliation, medical students, and international collaborations. The Journal is capturing contributions from an increasingly diverse authorship, consistent with the changing demographics of plastic surgeons.

BACKGROUND In selecting breast implants for breast reconstruction, current preoperative planning largely relies on 2-dimensional measurements, which are often limited in suboptimal accuracy and objectivity. Although the introduction of 3-dimensional imaging modalities has further improved preoperative planning, they require in-depth analysis of accuracy if they are to be considered as a standardized part of preoperative planning. Thus, the present study analyzes the reliability of the Vectra 3D Imaging System in predicting breast mass and explores potential confounding variables that may limit its accuracy. METHODS A retrospective review of 202 breasts that received direct-to-implant reconstruction by a single surgeon between February 2015 and February 2019 was conducted. Variables recorded included Vectra predicted mass (VPM; in grams), mastectomy mass (MM; in grams), ptosis grade, and body mass index (BMI). Body mass index was classified as follows: underweight (BMI < 20 kg/m), normal (20 kg/m ≤ BMI < 25 kg/m), overweight (25 kg/m ≤ BMI < 30 kg/m), and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m). Cup size was approximated as follows: A and smaller (MM ≤250 g), B (250 g < MM ≤ 450 g), C (450 g < MM ≤ 600 g), and D and larger (MM ≥ 600 g). Correlation between MM and VPM was evaluated using 2-tailed Pearson correlation coefficients (r), and associated formula was derived from a linear model. Equality of variances was assessed with the Bartlett test. Correlation coefficients calculated for ptosis and BMI categories were then compared with the overall correlation coefficient. Significance was set at α = 0.05, and analyses were conducted in R 3.6.0, version 1.70. RESULTS There was a strong correlation between MM and VPM (R = 0.90, P < 0.0001). The following equation was derived to predict MM: [MM] = 0.8 × [VPM] + 32 (adjusted r = 0.81). The Bartlett test indicated that VPM varies significantly across cup sizes (P < 0.0001). Comparison of correlation coefficients for ptosis and BMI categories revealed a significantly reduced correlation coefficient for pseudoptosis (0.90 vs 0.75, P = 0.0425). CONCLUSIONS The present study suggests that the reliability of Vectra in predicting breast mass varies across cup sizes and that there exists a significantly decreased association between VPM and MM among pseudoptotic breasts. These are important considerations when using this technology in surgical planning.

Introduction While surgical interventions for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) ankylosis are well-documented, there is lack of consensus regarding the ideal approach in pediatric patients. Surgical interventions include gap arthroplasty, interpositional arthroplasty, or total joint reconstruction. Methods A systematic review of PubMed (Jan 1, 1990-Jan 1, 2017) and Scopus (Jan 1, 1990-Jan 1, 2017) was performed and included studies in English with at least one patient under the age of 18 diagnosed with TMJ ankylosis who underwent surgical correction. Primary outcomes of interest included surgical modality, preoperative maximum interincisal opening (MIO) (MIOpreop), postoperative MIO (MIOpostop), ΔMIO (ΔMIO = MIOpostop - MIOpreop), and complications. Results Twenty-four case series/reports with 176 patients and 227 joints were included. By independent sample t tests MIOpostop (mm) was greater for gap arthroplasty (30.18) compared to reconstruction (27.47) (t = 4.9, P = 0.043), interpositional arthroplasty (32.87) compared to reconstruction (t = 3.25, P = 0.002), but not for gap compared to interpositional (t = -1.9, P = 0.054). ΔMIO (mm) was greater for gap arthroplasty (28.67) compared to reconstruction (22.24) (t = 4.2, P = 0.001), interpositional arthroplasty (28.33) compared to reconstruction (t = 3.27, P = 0.002), but not for interpositional compared to gap (t = 0.29, P = 0.33). Weighted-average follow-up time was 28.37 months (N = 164). 4 of 176 (2.27%) patients reported development of re-ankylosis. There was no significant difference in occurrence of re-ankylosis between interventions. Conclusions Given the technical ease of gap arthroplasty and nonsignificant differences in ΔMIO, MIOpostop, or occurrence of re-ankylosis between gap and interpositional arthroplasty, gap arthroplasty should be considered for primary ankylosis repair in pediatric patients, with emphasis on postoperative physiotherapy to prevent recurrent-ankylosis.