Matching Procedures at the Time of Immediate Breast Reconstruction: An American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Study of 24,191 Patients

Analysis of Breast Aesthetic Revision Procedures after Unilateral Abdominal-based Free-flap Breast Reconstruction: A Single-center Experience with 1251 Patients

Although autologous free-flap breast reconstruction is the most durable means of reconstruction, it is unclear how many additional operations are needed to optimize the aesthetic outcome of the reconstructed breast. The present study aimed to determine the average number of elective breast revision procedures performed for aesthetic reasons in patients undergoing unilateral autologous breast reconstruction and to analyze variables associated with undergoing additional procedures.

Methods

A retrospective review of all unilateral abdominal-based free-flap breast reconstructions performed from 2000 to 2014 was undertaken at a tertiary academic center.

Results

Overall, 1251 patients were included in the analysis. The average number of breast revision procedures was 1.1 ± 0.9, and 903 patients (72.2%) underwent at least one revision procedure. Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that younger age, higher body mass index, and prior oncologic surgery on the reconstructed breast were factors associated with increased likelihood of undergoing a revision procedure. The probability of undergoing at least one revision increased by 4% with every 1-unit (kg/m²) increase in a patient's body mass index. Multiple Poisson regression modeling demonstrated that younger age, prior oncologic surgery on the reconstructed breast, and bipedicle flap reconstruction were significant factors associated with undergoing a greater number of revision procedures.

Conclusions

Most patients who undergo unilateral autologous breast reconstruction require at least one additional operation to optimize their breast aesthetic results. Young age and obesity increase the likelihood of undergoing additional operations. These findings can aid reconstructive microsurgeons in counseling patients and establishing patient expectations prior to their undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction.

Effect of contralateral augmentation on postoperative complications after the second stage of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction

Background

Contralateral augmentation mammoplasty in implant-based reconstruction could potentially lead to deterioration of the thickness of the mastectomy skin flap and increase postoperative complications of the reconstructed breast. We compared the complication rates of the reconstructed breast in the augmentation and no-augmentation groups among patients undergoing tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction.

Methods

Patients who underwent mastectomy followed by tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction between February 2010 and April 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome measures were complications and the need for a revision operation. The augmentation and no-augmentation groups underwent propensity score-matched analysis and the matched cases underwent multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results

From the 234 patients in the augmentation group and 517 patients in the no-augmentation group, 200 propensity score-matched pairs were obtained. Analysis of the matched pairs revealed that the augmentation group as compared to the no-augmentation group showed a significantly higher overall complication rate (13.5 percent versus 6.5 percent; P=0.025) and revision operation rate (9.0 percent versus 3.0 percent; P=0.019). Multivariable conditional logistic regression analyses of the matched cases revealed that contralateral augmentation (odds ratio, 3.457; 95% confidence interval, 1.039-11.498; P=0.043) was associated with increased odds for a revision operation of the reconstructed breast.

Conclusions

This study investigated the postoperative complications of the reconstructed breast associated with contralateral augmentation mammoplasty in patients who underwent mastectomy followed by tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. The augmentation group had a higher revision operation rate than did the no-augmentation group. A clinical evaluation of the risks and benefits of contralateral augmentation and preoperative counseling may be indicated for patients who are undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction and are candidates for contralateral augmentation mammoplasty.

Scoping Review of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in Plastic Surgery Research

Background

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a robust, high-quality surgical outcomes database that measures risk-adjusted 30-day outcomes of surgical interventions. The purpose of this scoping review is to describe how the NSQIP is being used in plastic surgery research.

Methods

A comprehensive electronic literature search was completed in PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and CINAHL. Two reviewers independently reviewed articles to determine their relevance using predefined inclusion criteria. Articles were included if they utilized NSQIP data to conduct research in a domain of plastic surgery or analyzed surgical procedures completed by plastic surgeons. Extracted information included the domain of plastic surgery, country of origin, journal, and year of publication.

Results

A total of 106 articles met the inclusion criteria. The most common domain of plastic surgery was breast reconstruction representing 35% of the articles. Of the 106 articles, 95% were published within the last 5 years. The Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery journal published most of the (59%) NSQIP-related articles. All of the studies were retrospective. Of note, there were no articles on burns and only one study on trauma as the domain of plastic surgery.

Conclusion

This scoping review describes how NSQIP data are being used to analyze plastic surgery interventions and outcomes in order to guide quality improvement in 106 articles. It demonstrates the utility of NSQIP in the literature, however also identifies some limitations of the program as it applies to plastic surgery.

Impact of Contralateral Symmetry Procedures on Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes following Unilateral Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 One aim of unilateral postmastectomy breast reconstruction (BR) is to restore symmetry with the contralateral breast. As such, unilateral prosthetic reconstruction often requires a contralateral symmetry procedure (CSP). There is sparse literature on the impact of CSPs on long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aims to describe PROs following CSPs, using a validated PRO tool, BREAST-Q. The hypothesis is that CSPs are associated with greater patient-reported satisfaction and HRQoL.

METHODS

 This study is a single institutional analysis of prospectively collected BREAST-Q scores of patients who underwent unilateral prosthetic BR during 2011 to 2015. Women 18 years and older with BREAST-Q scores measured ≥ 9months after BR with or without CSP(s) at the time of expander replacement were included. Patients were classified into four subcohorts: augmentation, mastopexy, reduction, and no symmetry procedure (controls). Sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, and BREAST-Q scores were analyzed. Multivariable linear regression was performed.

RESULTS

 Of 553 patients, 67 (12%) underwent contralateral augmentation, 68 (12%) mastopexy, 93(17%) reduction, and 325 (59%) were controls. Mean follow-up time was 52 months. Satisfaction with breast and outcomes were higher in the augmentation compared with the control groups (p = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, augmentation remained an independent predictor of satisfaction with breast (p = 0.04). Physical well-being scores were lower for contralateral mastopexy and reduction compared with the controls with a trend toward statistical significance on multivariable models. Psychological and sexual well-being was similar across groups.

CONCLUSION

 Prosthetic reconstruction with contralateral breast augmentation was associated with greater satisfaction with breast and reconstructive outcome. In contrast, breast reduction and mastopexy procedures demonstrated equivalent satisfaction with breasts compared with controls but may be associated with lower physical well-being. Such information can be used to improve the shared decision-making process for women who choose unilateral prosthetic BR.