Search

Background Cosmetic breast surgeries such as augmentation, mastopexy, and reduction are common aesthetic medical procedures for enhancing physical appearance. Despite their popularity, the influence of these surgeries on subsequent breast reconstruction for cancer patients remains underexplored. Objectives In this study we sought to investigate the effects of previous cosmetic breast surgeries on the outcomes of breast reconstruction. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted from January 2011 to May 2023. This analysis compared patients with histories of implant augmentation, breast reduction, mastopexy, and augmentation mastopexy with those receiving reconstruction without any cosmetic surgery history. Demographics, comorbidities, complications, revisions, and BREAST-Q surveys were collected. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS, with significance set at P <.05. Results The study included 124 patients (50 autologous, 74 implant) with a history of cosmetic breast surgery (102 implant augmentations, 17 breast reductions, 5 mastopexies, and 9 augmentation mastopexies). They were analyzed in comparison with 1307 patients (683 autologous, 624 implant) without previous cosmetic breast surgery. Patients with previous cosmetic surgeries showed a higher incidence of hematoma with tissue expander placement. A preference for implant-based reconstruction was more common among patients with an augmentation history (P <.001), whereas autologous reconstruction was more common in those with a history of breast reduction (P =.047). Patients with a history of breast augmentation had on average significantly more breast revisions (P <.05). Conclusions In this study we demonstrate a significantly higher hematoma rate and number of revisions in patients with previous cosmetic breast surgery when compared to patients without a history of cosmetic surgery. Furthermore, we suggest that types of cosmetic breast surgery influence the decision-making process regarding implant vs autologous reconstruction. Level of Evidence: 4 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been widely shown to yield positive outcomes, including in plastic surgery. Our group has previously validated ERAS in our deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction population. Objectives We evaluated whether the ERAS protocol and addition of liposomal bupivacaine affected patient outcomes at the time of mastectomy and first-stage tissue expander reconstruction. Methods All patients treated between July 2021 and May 2022 were reviewed retrospectively. The ERAS protocol was implemented in December 2021. Two patient groups were compared: pre-ERAS and ERAS. The ERAS protocol included use of liposomal bupivacaine in the pectoralis nerve block 1/2 planes. Primary outcomes were observed with postoperative length of stay and hospital narcotic use. Results Eighty-one patients were analyzed in this cohort. The pre-ERAS group was composed of 41 patients, the ERAS group was composed of 83 patients. Postoperative length of stay was significantly reduced in the ERAS group (1.7 pre-ERAS vs 1.1 ERAS, P =.0004). When looking at morphine equivalents during the hospital stay, the degree of narcotics in the recovery room was relatively similar. Average PACU pain morphine equivalents were 6.1 pre-ERAS vs 7.1 ERAS (P =.406). However, total hospital morphine equivalents were significantly lower in the ERAS group (65.0 pre-ERAS vs 26.2 ERAS, P = <.001). Conclusions The introduction of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol with liposomal bupivacaine pectoralis 1/2 nerve blocks decreased postoperative opioid consumption and hospital length of stay in mastectomy patients undergoing tissue expander–based reconstruction. Level of Evidence: 4 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction (MABR) remains the gold standard technique of breast reconstruction, providing a durable, natural, and aesthetically pleasing result. However, some patients may not be candidates for a traditional deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap, either due to abdominal tissue paucity, the need for higher-volume reconstruction, or prior surgical procedures. In these patients, alternative flaps must be considered to achieve the optimal result. Such configurations include the conjoined (or double pedicle) DIEP flap, and alternative flaps such as the lumbar artery perforator (LAP) and profunda artery perforator (PAP) flaps, which can be combined in a stacked fashion. By combining multiple flaps in a conjoined or stacked fashion, breast reconstruction can be optimized to fulfill the three critical components of breast reconstruction in restoring the skin envelope, breast footprint, and conus shape. When harvesting multiple flaps, the surgical sequence of events must be meticulously planned to ensure an efficient and successful operation. Preoperative imaging can aid the surgeon in identifying the ideal perforator, assess for side branches for possible intra-flap anastomoses, expedite the operative time, and decrease intraoperative complications. Reconstructive surgeons should be familiar with the variety of configurations with conjoined and/or stacked flaps to address patient-specific reconstructive needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The most common method for autologous breast reconstruction is the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. The umbilicus can be managed in various ways, including re-inset, neoumbilicus, and umbilectomy without reconstruction. This study evaluated the aesthetic differences in umbilicus reconstruction choice and variation in patients' postoperative satisfaction with their abdomen. Methods A retrospective review of 1,019 patients treated with DIEP flap breast reconstruction between August 2009 and January 2022 was conducted. Patients were stratified by management of the umbilicus: preservation and re-inset of the native umbilicus, umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction, and umbilectomy with no reconstruction. A crowdsourced survey was created to assess the aesthetic preference of each photograph using a Likert scale. Results There were 1,063 responses to the umbilicus preference crowd source survey. Patients who had delayed umbilicus reconstruction after umbilectomy were rated to be significantly more attractive (4.397 ± 1.697) than both preservation of the native umbilicus (4.176 ± 1.669) and lack of the umbilicus (3.994 ± 1.733; p < 0.001 and <0.001, respectively). In an analysis of the BREAST-Q scores, delayed reconstruction patients had a similar change across measures when compared to the re-inset group. The delayed group had a significantly higher change in overall satisfaction and well-being with abdomen when compared with the no reconstruction group (p = 0.006 and 0.027, respectively). Conclusion This study demonstrates that umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction yields a significantly higher aesthetic rating and comparable patient satisfaction when compared to re-inset of the umbilicus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]