Reconstructive Burnout after Mastectomy: Implications for Patient Selection

One-Stage Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Salvage of Infected Tissue Expanders

BACKGROUND

Tissue expander-based breast reconstruction is associated with high rates of infectious complications, often leading to tissue expander explants and delays in receipt of definitive breast reconstruction and adjuvant therapy. In this study, we describe a single-stage technique where deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps are used to salvage actively infected tissue expanders among patients originally planning for free flap reconstruction.

METHODS

In this technique, patients with tissue expander infections without systemic illness are maintained on oral antibiotics until the day of their DIEP flap surgery, at which time tissue expander explant is performed in conjunction with aggressive attempt at total capsulectomy and immediate DIEP flap reconstruction. Patients are maintained on 1-2 weeks of oral antibiotics tailored to culture data. Patients undergoing this immediate salvage protocol were retrospectively reviewed, and complications and length of stay were assessed.

RESULTS

In a retrospective series, a total of six consecutive patients with culture-proven tissue expander infections underwent tissue expander removal and DIEP flap reconstruction in a single stage and were maintained on 7-14 days of oral antibiotics postoperatively. Within this cohort, no surgical site infections, microvascular complications, partial flap losses, reoperations, or returns to the operating room were noted within a 90-day period.

CONCLUSIONS

Among a select cohort of patients, actively infected tissue expanders may be salvaged with free flap breast reconstruction in a single surgery with a low incidence of postoperative complications. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the influence of this treatment strategy on costs, number of surgeries, and dissatisfaction after staged breast reconstruction complicated by tissue expander infections.

Buried Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Outcomes and Technical Considerations

The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes in patients undergoing buried and non-buried free flaps for breast reconstruction, in addition to evaluating the safety and reliability of venous flow couplers. A retrospective review was performed of all patients undergoing free flap breast reconstruction between 2013 and 2023. The primary outcomes were free flap failure, complications and the number of procedures required to complete the reconstructive journey. A total of 322 flaps were performed in 254 consecutive patients, with 47.5% (n = 153) being buried and 52.0% (n = 169) being non-buried reconstructions. The most common flap of choice being deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps (81.9%) followed by profunda artery perforator flaps (14.3%). There was no significant difference between the two groups in complications, including flap failure (buried 2.0% vs. non-buried 1.8% p = 0.902). There was a significant reduction in the number of procedures required to complete the reconstructive journey, with 52.2% (n = 59) of patients undergoing single-stage breast reconstruction in the buried group compared with only 25.5% (n = 36) in the non-buried group (p < 0.001). Two (0.6%) patients experienced a false negative in which the signal of the flow coupler was lost but the flap was perfused during re-exploration. No flap losses occurred without being identified in advance by a loss of audible venous flow signal. Buried free flap breast reconstruction is safe and requires fewer operations to complete patients' reconstructive journey. Flow couplers are a safe and effective method of monitoring buried free flaps in breast reconstruction.

Operative Time Predicts Long-Term Abdominal Morbidity and Complication Requiring Treatment after DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 The relationship between skin-to-skin operative time and long-term complications, as well as complications requiring treatment, after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstructions has not been thoroughly investigated. The study objective was to evaluate if operative time would independently prognosticate the type and number of treated complications, as well as long-term abdominal morbidity.

METHODS

 Patients who underwent bilateral DIEP flaps from 2010 to 2021 by two senior surgeons with standardized surgical and postoperative protocols were retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion required at least 1 year of postoperative follow-up. Extensive multivariable regression analyses were utilized to adjust for potential confounders, including measures of intraoperative complexity.

RESULTS

 Three hundred thirty-five patients were entered into multivariable analyses. After risk adjustment, there was a significant increase in the risk of all treated complications per hour. Each hour of operation increased risk of complications requiring extended hospital stay for treatment by 25%, flap-site complications requiring readmission treatment by 24%, and flap-site complications requiring extended hospital stay for treatment by 26% (all p < 0.0001). Long-term abdominal morbidity (abdominal bulge) increased by 25% per hour of operative time (p < 0.0001). The number of complications requiring treatment, abdominal donor-site complications, and complications requiring extended hospital stay for treatment had statistically significant linear relationships with the duration of surgery (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

 Operative time predicts long-term abdominal morbidity and complications requiring treatment, especially impacting the odds of developing abdominal bulges and complications requiring extended hospital stay for treatment or readmission treatment. This study emphasizes the importance of reducing operative time to improve DIEP flap breast reconstruction outcomes.

Prepectoral versus Submuscular Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Matched-Pair Comparison of Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction is the most common reconstructive approach after mastectomy. Prepectoral implants offer advantages over submuscular implants, such as less animation deformity, pain, weakness, and postradiation capsular contracture. However, clinical outcomes after prepectoral reconstruction are debated. The authors performed a matched-cohort analysis of outcomes after prepectoral and submuscular reconstruction at a large academic medical center.

METHODS

Patients treated with implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy from January of 2018 through October of 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were propensity score exact matched to control demographic, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative differences. Outcomes assessed included surgical-site occurrences, capsular contracture, and explantation of either expander or implant. Subanalysis was done on infections and secondary reconstructions.

RESULTS

A total of 634 breasts were included (prepectoral, 197; submuscular, 437). A total of 292 breasts were matched (146 prepectoral:146 submuscular) and analyzed for clinical outcomes. Prepectoral reconstructions were associated with greater rates of SSI (prepectoral, 15.8%; submuscular, 3.4%; P < 0.001), seroma (prepectoral, 26.0%; submuscular, 10.3%; P < 0.001), and explantation (prepectoral, 23.3%; submuscular, 4.8%; P < 0.001). Subanalysis of infections revealed that prepectoral implants have shorter time to infection, deeper infections, and more Gram-negative infections, and are more often treated surgically (all P < 0.05). There have been no failures of secondary reconstructions after explantation in the entire population at a mean follow-up of 20.1 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction is associated with higher rates of infection, seroma, and explantation compared with submuscular reconstructions. Infections of prepectoral implants may need different antibiotic management to avoid explantation. Secondary reconstruction after explantation can result in long-term success.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Implant-Based Reconstruction: How Do We Choose?

Aspects of a patient's lifestyle, their state of health, breast size, and mastectomy skin flap quality are factors that influence the suggested plane of dissection in implant-based breast reconstruction. This article aims to review developments in prosthetic breast reconstruction and provide recommendations to help providers choose whether prepectoral or subpectoral reconstruction in the best approach for each of their patients.