Breast reconstruction during the COVID-19 pandemic: Single institution experience from the pandemic's epicenter in the United States

Acceptance of outpatient enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS©) protocols for implant-based breast reconstruction nudged on by the COVID-19 pandemic

We retrospectively identified 295 women undergoing outpatient implant breast reconstruction (IBR) who received standardized ERAS care pre-pandemic (PP; April 2018-March 2020) and during the pandemic (DP; April 2020-March 2022). The majority of IBR was completed as outpatient surgeries DP versus PP (73% versus 38%, p < 0.001). Immediate IBR increased DP versus PP (p < 0.001). Preoperative ERAS© order sets were used 54% of the time. Lack of ERAS© order set use was associated with unplanned admissions (55.3% versus 44.7%, p = 0.02). COVID-19 changed health care and nudged IBR to outpatient procedures. With ERAS© recommendations, IBR can be safely and effectively transitioned to outpatient settings.

Safety and factors affecting same-day discharge following mastectomy and immediate alloplastic reconstruction

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patients undergoing breast reconstruction following mastectomy are often admitted overnight. In 2020, our institution implemented a protocol change to discharge clinically stable patients immediately. In this study, we examine the safety of same-day discharge following mastectomy and reconstruction.

METHODS

Our retrospective study included female adults undergoing mastectomy and immediate alloplastic reconstruction from August 2019 to January 2020, before implementation of the same-day discharge protocol, and from March 2020 to September 2021, after the protocol implementation. Independent t-test and chi-square analysis was conducted to examine statistical differences.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighty-five patients were included. Forty-two patients underwent reconstruction before the protocol change (Group 1) and 243 patients underwent reconstruction after the protocol change (Group 2). Group 2 had a greater percentage of prepectoral implant placement. There was no difference in demographics, complications, readmission, or reoperation. Within Group 2, 157 patients were discharged the same day (Group 2a) and 88 patients required overnight admission (Group 2b). Group 2b had higher body mass index, higher percentage of bilateral mastectomy, and larger mastectomy weights. Despite no differences in complications, Group 2b exhibited higher rates of requiring intravenous antibiotics and reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients may be safely discharged the same day following mastectomy and alloplastic reconstruction without an increase in complications.

Safety analysis of immediate breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap in the post-COVID-19 era: a comparison between pre- and post-pandemic cohorts

Background

The demand for immediate breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is recovering as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transitions from a pandemic to an endemic. This study sought to evaluate the safety of resuming DIEP flap reconstruction in the post-COVID-19 era.

Methods

Consecutive breast cancer patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with a DIEP flap at the Comprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital were retrospectively included in the study. The patients were divided into a post-pandemic group (Group A) and a pre-pandemic group (Group B). The clinicopathological factors, surgical procedures, and rates of post-operative complications were compared between the two groups using the Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-squared test.

Results

A total of 167 patients were included in the study, of whom 119 (71.3%) were in Group A and 48 (28.7%) were in Group B. The two groups had similar clinicopathological features, including age (P=0.988), body mass index (P=0.504), and tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) stage (P=0.932). The Group A patients were more likely to receive single perforator DIEP flap transplantation than the Group B patients (n=28, 22.8% vs. n=3, 5.8%, P=0.007). There was a numerical decrease in the mean operating time of Group A patients compared to Group B patients (9.82 vs. 10.12 hours, P=0.172). The mean length of stay after the surgery was significantly shorter after the pandemic than before the pandemic (11.2 vs. 14.3 days, P<0.001). The complication rates between the two groups were similar.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that resuming DIEP reconstruction is safe in the post-COVID-19 era.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical presentation, treatments, and outcomes of new breast cancer patients: A retrospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

The SARS CoV-2 pandemic disrupted healthcare systems. We compared the cancer stage for new breast cancers (BCs) before and during the pandemic.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study on the data warehouse of Greater Paris University Hospitals (AP-HP). We identified all female patients newly referred with a BC in 2019 and 2020. We assessed the timeline of their care trajectories, initial tumor stage, and treatment received: BC resection, exclusive systemic therapy, exclusive radiation therapy, or exclusive best supportive care (BSC). We calculated patients' 1-year overall survival (OS) and compared indicators in 2019 and 2020.

RESULTS

In 2019 and 2020, 2055 and 1988, new BC patients underwent cancer treatment, and during the two lockdowns, the BC diagnoses varied by -18% and by +23% compared to 2019. De novo metastatic tumors (15% and 15%, p = 0.95), pTNM and ypTNM distributions of 1332 cases with upfront resection and of 296 cases with neoadjuvant therapy did not differ (p = 0.37, p = 0.3). The median times from first multidisciplinary meeting and from diagnosis to treatment of 19 days (interquartile 11-39 days) and 35 days (interquartile 22-65 days) did not differ. Access to plastic surgery (15% and 17%, p = 0.08) and to treatment categories did not vary: tumor resection (73% and 72%), exclusive systemic therapy (13% and 14%), exclusive radiation therapy (9% and 9%), exclusive BSC (5% and 5%) (p = 0.8). Among resected patients, the neoadjuvant therapy rate was lower in 2019 (16%) versus 2020 (20%) (p = 0.02). One-year OS rates were 99.3% versus 98.9% (HR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.77-1.2), 72.6% versus 76.6% (HR = 1.28; 95% CI, 0.95-1.72), 96.6% versus 97.8% (HR = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.61-1.94), and 15.5% versus 15.1% (HR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.72-1.37), in the treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a decrease in the number of new BCs, there was no tumor stage shift, and OS did not vary.

Prior COVID-19 Infection Predisposes to Worse Outcomes After Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Major shifts in health care systems worldwide have occurred because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). With nearly half of all Americans now having a history of COVID-19 infection, there is a pressing need to better understand the importance of prior COVID-19 infection as a potential surgical risk factor. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of a history of prior COVID-19 infection on patient outcomes after autologous breast reconstruction.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study using the TriNetX research database, which contains deidentified patient records from 58 participating international health care organizations. All patients who underwent autologous breast reconstruction between March 1, 2020, and April 9, 2022, were included and were grouped based on history of a prior COVID-19 infection. Demographic, preoperative risk factors, and 90-day postoperative complication data were compared. Data were analyzed by propensity score-matched analysis on TriNetX. Statistical analyses were performed by Fisher exact, χ2, and Mann-Whitney U tests as appropriate. Significance was set at P values of <0.05.

RESULTS

Patients with a history of autologous breast reconstruction within our temporal study window (N = 3215) were divided into groups with (n = 281) and without (n = 3603) a prior COVID-19 diagnosis. Nonmatched patients with prior COVID-19 had increased rates of select 90-day postoperative complications, including wound dehiscence, contour deformities, thrombotic events, any surgical site complications, and any complications overall. Use of anticoagulant, antimicrobial, and opioid medications was also found to be higher in those with prior COVID-19.After performing propensity-score matching, each cohort consisted of 281 patients without statistically significant differences between any baseline characteristics. When comparing outcomes between matched cohorts, patients with a history of COVID-19 had increased rates of wound dehiscence (odds ratio [OR], 1.90; P = 0.030), thrombotic events (OR, 2.83; P = 0.0031), and any complications (OR, 1.52; P = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that prior COVID-19 infection is a significant risk factor for adverse outcomes after autologous breast reconstruction. Patients with a history of COVID-19 have 183% higher odds of postoperative thromboembolic events, warranting careful patient selection and postoperative management.

Breast Cancer Management in the Era of Covid-19; Key Issues, Contemporary Strategies, and Future Implications

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several priority diseases were not getting sufficient attention. Whilst breast cancer is a fatal disease affecting millions worldwide, identification and management of these patients did not initially attract critical attention to minimize the impact of lockdown, post-lockdown, and other measures. Breast cancer patients' conditions may not remain stable without proper care, worsening their prognosis. Proper care includes the timely instigation of surgery, systemic therapy, and psychological support. This includes low-and middle-income countries where there are already concerns with available personnel and medicines to adequately identify and treat these patients. Consequently, there was a need to summarize the current scenario regarding managing breast cancer care during COVID-19 across all countries, including any guidelines developed. We systematically searched three scientific databases and found 76 eligible articles covering the medical strategies of high-income countries versus LMICs. Typically, diagnostic facilities in hospitals were affected at the beginning of the pandemic following the lockdown and other measures. This resulted in more advanced-stage cancers being detected at initial presentation across countries, negatively impacting patient outcomes. Other than increased telemedicine, instigating neo-adjuvant endocrine therapy more often, reducing non-essential visits, and increasing the application of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy to meet the challenges, encouragingly, there was no other significant difference among patients in high-income versus LMICs. Numerous guidelines regarding patient management evolved during the pandemic to address the challenges posed by lockdowns and other measures, which were subsequently adopted by various high-income countries and LMICs to improve patient care. The psychological impact of COVID-19 and associated lockdown measures, especially during the peak of COVID-19 waves, and the subsequent effect on the patient's mental health must also be considered in this high-priority group. We will continue to monitor the situation to provide direction in future pandemics.