Search

The profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap for breast reconstruction was first published in 2012. Since then, many centers implemented its application as second-line treatment for breast reconstruction in cases where patient characteristics make the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap not feasible to perform. In our center, we established the PAP flap as a first-line procedure for a multitude of reasons for a specific patient population. This study describes perioperative measure, clinical outcomes, and patient-reported outcome measures in comparison to the gold standard, the DIEP flap. In this study, we analyzed all PAP flaps and DIEP flaps performed in a single center between March 2018 and December 2020. We present patient characteristics, surgical technique, perioperative care, surgical outcomes, and complications. The Breast-Q was used to assess patient-reported outcome measures. A total of 85 PAP flaps and 122 DIEP flaps were performed within 34 months. Average follow-up was 11.6 ± 5.8 months for the PAP group and 11.1 ± 5.8 months for the DIEP group (p = 0.621). Patients' average body mass index was higher in the DIEP flap recipients. Operation time was shorter and ambulation faster in PAP flap recipients. DIEP flap application resulted in higher Breast-Q scores. While the PAP flap demonstrated favorable perioperative measures, outcome measures were better with the DIEP flap. The PAP flap is fairly new and demonstrates high potential while still showing a need for refinement compared to the DIEP flap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Autologous breast reconstruction is a reliable solution for many patients after mastectomy. While this technique represents a standardized approach in many patients, patients with ptotic breasts may require a combination of procedures to achieve an aesthetically pleasing result. Methods: We reviewed the mastectomy and free-flap breast reconstruction procedures performed at our institution from 2018 to 2022 in patients with ptotic breasts. The technique used to address the ptosis was put in focus as we present the four strategies used by our reconstructive surgeons. We performed two different one-stage and two different two-stage procedures. The difference between the two-stage procedures was the way the nipple areola complex was treated (inferior dermal pedicle or free skin graft). The difference between the one-stage procedures was the time of execution of the mastopexy/breast reduction (before or after the mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction). Results: The one-stage procedure was performed with a free NAC in three patients and with a pedicled NAC in five patients. The two-stage procedure was performed in seven patients, with six of them undergoing mastopexy before and one patient undergoing mastopexy after the bilateral mastectomy and autologous reconstruction. No flap loss or total loss of the nipple areola complex occurred. Partial NAC loss was observed in five breasts in the single-stage group without any occurrence in the double-stage group. Conclusions: While both one- and two-stage procedures were performed in a safe fashion with satisfactory results at our institution, larger trials are required to determine which procedure may yield the best possible outcomes. These outcomes should also include oncological safety and patient-reported outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although microsurgical breast reconstruction represents a very interesting and rewarding field of plastic surgery, appropriate microsurgical training is not possible in every plastic surgery department. In this retrospective study, we present the learning curve of our plastic surgery department as a whole and of a single microsurgeon assessing breast reconstruction procedures with a deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap between July 2018 and June 2021. The present study included 115 patients and 161 flaps. Cases were stratified into single DIEP/double DIEP groups and into early and late groups based on the flap order. Surgery times and postoperative complications were analyzed. Regarding the institution, the length of hospital stay was lower in the late group than in the early group (single 7.1 ± 1.8 vs. 6.3 ± 1.5 days, p = 0.019; double 8.5 ± 3.8 vs. 6.6 ± 1.4 days, p = 0.043). Apart from that, no statistically significant differences were found between the start and end of our study. In terms of the single surgeon, there was a significant improvement in the total surgery time (single 296.0 ± 78.7 vs. 227.5 ± 54.7 min, p = 0.018; double 448.0 ± 85.6 vs. 341.2 ± 43.1 min, p = 0.008), flap ischemia time (53.6 ± 15.1 vs. 40.9 ± 9.5 min, p = 0.007) and length of stay among the compared groups. There was no significant difference in flap loss rate or other complications between the early and late groups. Further performance of surgeries seemed to improve the surgeon's skills as well as the overall experience of the medical institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: Postoperative flap loss and wound healing disorders are severe complications after microsurgical free flap surgery. Despite multiple clinical observations, a possible influence of season and external temperature on outcome are largely missing. (2) Methods: Retrospectively, data were collected from 151 patients receiving microsurgical free flaps from March 2018 to August 2019. Patients were divided into two cohorts. The winter group includes all patients who underwent surgery from October 2018 to March 2019 and the summer group al those who underwent surgery from April 2018 to September 2018. Data included demographic information, pre-existing conditions, flap characteristics, and postoperative complications like flap losses and wound healing problems. External temperatures during the first 14 postoperative days were documented and the predictor of flap loss and wound healing disorders was detected. (3) Results: In the winter group (October-March; Ø 7.24 °C) 72 patients (46 female, 24 males; Ø 57.0 years) and in the summer group (April-September; Ø 18.79 °C) 81 patients (48 female, 33 males; Ø 56.0 years) received free flap surgery. There were no significant differences in demography (age: p = 0.593; gender: p = 0.419; BMI: p = 0.141). We found a significant increase in flap loss during summer (χ2(1) = 6.626; p = 0.010; V = 0.209) strengthened by logistic regression analysis (p = 0.037; Exp(B) = 9.655). Additionally higher average temperatures 14 days postoperatively represents another main driver (p = 0.023, Exp(B) = 1.161) for postoperative flap loss. (4) Conclusions: The data confirm a significantly higher postoperative flap loss in the summer group. This information may potentially contribute to optimization of perioperative management and planning of elective and semi-elective surgeries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has evolved over the past decades. Currently, novel robotic systems for microsurgery are being launched onto the European market. This novel microscope (RoboticScope®, BHS, Innsbruck, Austria) is a high-definition camera system, connected to an augmented reality headset, projecting a clear image with high magnification in front of the surgeon's eyes. Motion tracking translates the surgeon's head movements onto the system via a multi-axis robotic arm. We report the first use of the robotic microscope for autologous breast reconstruction in humans. : In May 2020, ten autologous breast reconstructions were performed by our Team. Five reconstructions (three PAP flaps, one bilateral DIEP flap) were conducted with the robotic microscope and matched to five reconstructions using a conventional microscope. We compared ischaemia times, times for arterial and venous anastomosis, and complications. : All procedures were performed successfully and safely. Overall time for anastomosis was 31 min (+/- 7 min) in the robotic group and 25 min (+/- 7 min, p = 0.30) in the control group. Flap ischaemia was 54 min (+/- 8 min) in the robotic group and 52 min (+/- 22 min, p = 0.87) in the control group. No intraoperative complications such as venous thrombosis or arterial embolism occurred. : Robotic microscopes provide the technology to combine flexibility to choose different angles during pedicle preparation and improve the stationary procedure of vessel anastomosis. Novel robotic systems tailored towards refinement in microsurgery hold great potential for implementation in Plastic Surgery procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]