Infectious Loss of Tissue Expanders in Breast Reconstruction: Are We Treating the Right Organisms?

A novel technique of reverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction: medium-term oncological safety outcomes and feasibility of 24-hour discharge for breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Due to the short operation time and no need for special instruments, reverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-E-NSM) with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DIBR) has been rapidly becoming popular in the last three years. However, there has yet to be an evaluation of its oncologic safety or the feasibility of discharging patients within 24 hours.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this single-center retrospective cohort study, individuals diagnosed with stage 0-III breast cancer between May 2020 and April 2022 who underwent traditional open mastectomy or R-E-NSM with DIBR were included. Follow-up started on the date of surgery and ended in December 2023. Data, including demographics, tumor characteristics, medium-term oncological outcomes, and postoperative complications, were collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize selection bias.

RESULTS

This study included 1679 patients (median [IQR] age, 50 [44-57] years). Of these, 344 patients underwent R-E-NSM with DIBR (RE-R group), and 1335 patients underwent traditional open mastectomy (TOM group). The median [IQR] follow-up time was 30 [24-36] months (29 [23-33] months in the RE-R group and 30 [24-36] months in the TOM group). Regarding before or after PSM, the P value of local recurrence-free survival (LRFS, 0.910 and 0.450), regional recurrence-free survival (RRFS, 0.780 and 0.620), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS, 0.061 and 0.130), overall survival (OS, 0.260 and 0.620), disease-free survival (DFS, 0.120 and 0.330) were not significantly different between the RE-R group and the TOM group. The 3y-LRFS and 3y-DFS rates were 99.0% and 97.1% for the RE-R group and 99.5% and 95.3% for the TOM group, respectively. The rates of any complications and major complications were not significantly different between the RE-R patients who were discharged within 24 hours and the RE-R patients who were not discharged within 24 hours (P=0.290, P=0.665, respectively) or the TOM patients who were discharged within 24 hours (P =0.133, P=0.136, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

R-E-NSM with DIBR is an innovative oncologic surgical procedure that not only improves cosmetic outcomes but also ensures reliable oncologic safety and fewer complications, enabling patients to be safely discharged within 24 hours. A long-term prospective multicenter assessment will be supporting.

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.

Minimally Invasive and Innovative Management of Prosthesis Infections in Endoscopic-Assisted Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Implant infection continues to be the most common complication of breast reconstruction, and it can lead to serious consequences of implant loss. Recently, endoscopic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction is being performed more frequently, with similar prosthetic infection incidence compared to conventional techniques. But there is little information published in the literature on the management of periprosthetic infection in endoscopic-assisted breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent endoscope-assisted breast reconstruction and developed periprosthetic infection between January 2020 and December 2022. Prosthesis infection was defined as any case where antibiotics were given, beyond the surgeon's standard perioperative period, in response to clinical signs such as swelling, pain, erythema, increased temperature, fever, etc. We summarized our clinical approach and treatment protocol for periprosthetic infection patients. Collected data include preoperative basic information, surgical details, postoperative data, and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 580 patients (713 reconstructions) underwent endoscopic-assisted immediate breast reconstruction. There were 58 patients developed periprosthetic infection, 14 of whom had bilateral prosthesis reconstruction with unilateral prosthesis infection. The incidence of infection was 10.0%. Average follow-up was 17.3 ± 8.9 months (range = 2-37 months). Of the 58 patients, 53 (91.4%) patients successful salvaged implant and 5(8.6%) patients removed prosthesis. During follow-up, Baker III capsular contracture occurred in 2 patients (3.8%) who had radiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Our management of prosthesis infections in endoscopic-assisted breast reconstruction is easy, minimally invasive, and inexpensive. This method can be repeated if the implant infection does not improve after the first drainage. What's more, our data suggest that our prosthesis salvage of periprosthetic infection is effective.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

The current use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction: device design, features, and technical considerations

INTRODUCTION

The use of tissue expanders (TE) in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is a widely accepted practice, especially in patients desiring implant-based breast reconstruction. It has become the standard of care to perform a two-staged breast reconstruction using tissue expanders for the past 50 years due to its reliability, safety, cost-effectiveness, and versatility. Due to its popularity, there are numerous types and features of breast tissue expanders and various surgical approaches available for plastic surgeons.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we will review the role of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction, the types and features of breast tissue expanders, and technical considerations.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction offers significant advantages of preserving the breast skin envelope and reestablishing the breast mound. With evolving approaches to breast reconstruction, tissue expander design, and application underwent several refinements and modifications. Due to these advances, studies on its long-term efficacy and safety profile typically fall behind and more studies with higher levels of evidence are needed to better evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of tissue expanders. With increased understanding, reconstructive surgeons can minimize complications and maximize reconstructive, aesthetic outcomes with high patient satisfaction.

A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes in Prepectoral Smooth Versus Textured Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Textured tissue expanders (TEs) had previously gained popularity due to minimizing expander migration, rotation, and capsule migration. Recent studies, though, have revealed increased risk of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma associated with certain macrotextured implants, prompting surgeons at our institution to switch to smooth TEs; evaluation is thus required for specific viability and similarity of outcomes of smooth TEs. Our study aims to evaluate perioperative complications in prepectoral placement of smooth versus textured TEs.

METHODS

Our retrospective study evaluated perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent bilateral prepectoral TE placement, with either smooth or textured TE, at an academic institution between 2017 and 2021 performed by 2 reconstructive surgeons. The perioperative period was defined as the interval between expander placement until conversion to flap/implant or removal of TE due to complications. Our primary outcomes included hematoma, seroma, wounds, infection, unspecified redness, total number of complications, and returns to operating room secondary to complications. Secondary outcomes included time to drain removal, total number of expansions, hospital length of stay, length of time until the next breast reconstruction procedure, next breast reconstruction procedure, and number of expansions.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-two patients were evaluated in our study (141 textured, 81 smooth). After propensity matching (71 textured, 71 smooth), our univariate logistic regression showed no significant difference in perioperative complications between smooth and textured expanders (17.1% vs 21.1%; P = 0.396) or complications that required a return to the operating room (10.0% vs 9.2%; P = 0.809). No significant differences were noted for hematoma, seroma, infections, unspecified redness, or wounds between both groups. A significant difference was noted in days to drain out (18.57 ± 8.17 vs 20.13 ± 0.07, P = 0.001) and type of the next breast reconstruction procedure (P < 0.001). Our multivariate regression showed that breast surgeon, hypertension, smoking status, and mastectomy weight were significant for increased risk for complications.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates similar rates and effectiveness of smooth versus textured TE when used for prepectoral placement, making smooth TEs a safe and valuable alternative for breast reconstruction because of their decreased risk of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma compared with textured TEs.

Staphylococcus aureus Breast Implant Infection Isolates Display Recalcitrance To Antibiotic Pocket Irrigants

Breast implant-associated infections (BIAIs) are the primary complication following placement of breast prostheses in breast cancer reconstruction. Given the prevalence of breast cancer, reconstructive failure due to infection results in significant patient distress and health care expenditures. Thus, effective BIAI prevention strategies are urgently needed. This study tests the efficacy of one infection prevention strategy: the use of a triple antibiotic pocket irrigant (TAPI) against Staphylococcus aureus, the most common cause of BIAIs. TAPI, which consists of 50,000 U bacitracin, 1 g cefazolin, and 80 mg gentamicin diluted in 500 mL of saline, is used to irrigate the breast implant pocket during surgery. We used in vitro and in vivo assays to test the efficacy of each antibiotic in TAPI, as well as TAPI at the concentration used during surgery. We found that planktonically grown S. aureus BIAI isolates displayed susceptibility to gentamicin, cefazolin, and TAPI. However, TAPI treatment enhanced biofilm formation of BIAI strains. Furthermore, we compared TAPI treatment of a S. aureus reference strain (JE2) to a BIAI isolate (117) in a mouse BIAI model. TAPI significantly reduced infection of JE2 at 1 and 7 days postinfection (dpi). In contrast, BIAI strain 117 displayed high bacterial burdens in tissues and implants, which persisted to 14 dpi despite TAPI treatment. Lastly, we demonstrated that TAPI was effective against Pseudomonas aeruginosa reference (PAO1) and BIAI strains in vitro and in vivo. Together, these data suggest that S. aureus BIAI strains employ unique mechanisms to resist antibiotic prophylaxis treatment and promote chronic infection. IMPORTANCE The incidence of breast implant associated infections (BIAIs) following reconstructive surgery postmastectomy remains high, despite the use of prophylactic antibiotic strategies. Thus, surgeons have begun using additional antibiotic-based prevention strategies, including triple antibiotic pocket irrigants (TAPIs). However, these strategies fail to reduce BIAI rates for these patients. To understand why these therapies fail, we assessed the antimicrobial resistance patterns of Staphylococcus aureus strains, the most common cause of BIAI, to the antibiotics in TAPI (bacitracin, cefazolin, and gentamicin). We found that while clinically relevant BIAI isolates were more susceptible to the individual antibiotics compared to a reference strain, TAPI was effective at killing all the strains in vitro. However, in a mouse model, the BIAI isolates displayed recalcitrance to TAPI, which contrasted with the reference strain, which was susceptible. These data suggest that strains causing BIAI may encode specific recalcitrance mechanisms not present within reference strains.

Tissue Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction at a Major Safety-Net Hospital: Managing the Outsized Risk of Infection

Background

Immediate tissue expander (TE) breast reconstruction is reported to have the highest rate of postoperative infection among reconstructive modalities. The risk of infection is higher among patients treated at safety-net hospitals.

Objectives

The goal of this study was to identify significant contributing factors to the elevated infection risk at our major safety-net institution.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted on all TE-based reconstruction patients with a diagnosis of postoperative infection between 2015 and 2019. Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative risk factors for infection were determined and compared across patient and procedure demographics.

Results

Two hundred forty-three patients, for a total of 412 breast reconstructions, were included in our study. Significant preoperative selection factors were identified to contribute to the elevated risk of infection, including the following: older age, higher BMI, and diabetes. Significant intraoperative and postoperative contributing factors included greater mastectomy weight, larger TE's and intraoperative fill volume, and longer drain duration. Doxycycline treatment for infected patients resulted in a significantly higher rate of resolution.

Conclusions

Safety-net hospital population patients undergoing TE breast reconstruction are at higher risk for postoperative infection. Personal and procedural risk factors are identified. Balancing the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction with TEs with the elevated risk of postoperative infection remains challenging. Implementation of more stringent eligibility criteria may help mitigate the risk of infection.

Level of Evidence 4

Does the Duration of Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis Influence the Incidence of Postoperative Surgical-Site Infections in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Women with Breast Cancer? A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is an established concept to reduce the risk of surgical-site infections; however, the optimal treatment duration in prosthetic breast reconstruction is still controversial. This study evaluated a potential association between the perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis duration (≤24 hours versus >24 hours) and incidence of postoperative surgical-site infections in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

A descriptive, retrospective analysis of surgical-site infections after immediate implant-based breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients between January of 2011 and December of 2018 was performed. The incidence of postoperative surgical-site infections in patients with more than 24 hours of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis was compared to patients treated for 24 hours or less.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients who met criteria were included. There were no relevant epidemiologic, clinical, or histopathologic differences between groups. Surgical-site infections as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria occurred in 25.8 percent. A risk factor-adjusted analysis by a prespecified multiple logistic regression model showed that 24 hours or less of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis was not inferior to treatment for more than 24 hours. The upper limit of the one-sided 95 percent confidence interval of the risk difference was 9.4 percent (below the prespecified noninferiority margin of 10 percent leading to statistical significance). Risk factors for a surgical-site infection included obesity and postoperative wound complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The study found no association between short-course perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (≤24 hours) and an increased rate of postoperative surgical-site infection. This is of high clinical relevance because short-course treatment can help reduce side effects and the emergence of antimicrobial resistance and prevent surgical-site infections as effectively as a prolonged perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis course.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

In Vitro Evaluation of Common Antimicrobial Solutions Used for Breast Implant Soaking and Breast Pocket Irrigation-Part 2: Efficacy Against Biofilm-Associated Bacteria

Background

Biofilm-associated bacteria have been observed in both breast implant revision and tissue expander-implant exchange surgeries. The utilization of antimicrobial solutions in breast surgery, especially those containing triple antibiotics (TAB) and/or 10% povidone-iodine (PI), may help reduce existing biofilm-associated bacteria, which is particularly important in a mature breast pocket that may contain residual bacteria from a previously colonized implant surface or, theoretically, bacteria that may arrive postoperatively through hematogenous spread.

Objectives

A series of in vitro assessments was performed to evaluate the antimicrobial utility of TAB and PI, either alone or in combination, against preformed biofilm-associated bacteria.

Methods

Preformed biofilm-associated gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial strains were exposed to TAB and PI ± TAB for up to 30 minutes in a bacterial time-kill assay. Efficacy of various dilutions of PI and the effects of serum protein on PI efficacy were also investigated.

Results

TAB was ineffective at the timeframes tested when utilized alone; when utilized in conjunction with PI, significant log reduction of all biofilm-associated bacterial species tested was achieved when treated for at least 5 minutes. PI alone at a concentration of 25% or higher was also effective, although its efficacy was negatively affected by increasing serum protein concentration only for Staphylococcus epidermidis.

Conclusions

Our data indicate that PI-containing solutions significantly reduce biofilm-associated bacteria, suggesting potential utility for breast pocket irrigation during revision or exchange surgeries. Care should be taken to minimize excessive dilution of PI to maintain efficacy.

In Vitro Evaluation of Common Antimicrobial Solutions Used for Breast Implant Soaking and Breast Pocket Irrigation-Part 1: Efficacy Against Planktonic Bacteria

BACKGROUND

Planktonic bacteria can be inadvertently introduced during breast surgery procedures, which are hypothesized to lead to complications such as infection, capsular contracture, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, and a prolonged local inflammatory response. The utilization of antimicrobial solutions such as triple antibiotic solution (TAB) and/or 10% povidone-iodine (PI) in breast pocket irrigation or implant soaking has been proposed to reduce planktonic bacterial attachment and potential complications.

OBJECTIVES

A series of in vitro assessments were performed to evaluate the antimicrobial utility of TAB and PI, either alone or in combination, against planktonic bacteria.

METHODS

Planktonic gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial strains were exposed to TAB and PI ± TAB for up to 10 minutes in a bacterial time-kill assay. The efficacy of various dilutions of PI as well as the effects of serum protein on PI efficacy were also investigated.

RESULTS

TAB was ineffective at the timeframes tested (≤10 minutes) when utilized alone; however, when utilized with PI, significant log reduction of all tested planktonic species was achieved. PI alone was also effective, even including dilute concentrations (eg, 0.5% PI), although the presence of serum proteins required higher concentrations of PI (eg, 2.5%) to eradicate the bacterial load.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest PI-containing solutions may be preferred over either saline or TAB without PI for primary breast pocket irrigation and implant soaking in primary breast surgeries as a means to significantly reduce planktonic bacteria. These data provide an impetus for surgeons to re-evaluate the efficacy of TAB solution in these clinical settings.

Broad-Spectrum Antibiotics for Breast Expander/Implant Infection: Treatment-Related Adverse Events and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite best practices, infection remains the most common complication after breast reconstruction with expanders and implants, ranging from 2% to 29%. Empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics are frequently used in nonsurgical treatment of implant-associated infections in an effort to salvage the reconstruction. Pitfalls of antibiotherapy include adverse events, vascular access site complications, and drug resistance. Our goals were to describe management of implant infections with broad-spectrum antibiotics, review treatment related adverse events, and report on outcomes of therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was carried out to identify patients who were treated with intravenous (IV) antibiotics for periprosthetic infection. Patient characteristics, surgical details, and antibiotic therapy-related adverse events were collected. Eventual outcome related to expander/implant salvage was noted.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients (111 treatment episodes) were identified. Mean duration of antibiotic treatment was 18 days (range, 1-40 days). The most commonly used parenteral treatment was a combination of daptomycin with piperacillin-tazobactam (65%) or an alternative agent (16%). Fifty-nine percent of treatment episodes resulted in salvage of the expander or implant. Thirty-five percent treatment episodes were associated with 1 or more adverse events: diarrhea (12.6%), rash (10%), vaginal candidiasis (3.6%), agranulocytosis/neutropenic fever (3.6%), nausea (3.6%), urinary complaint (0.9%), myositis (0.9%), headache (0.9%), vascular line occlusion (1.8%), deep vein thrombosis (1.8%), and finger numbness (0.9%). No patients developed Clostridium difficile colitis. Five episodes (4%) needed discontinuation of antibiotics because of severe adverse events. The prosthesis was explanted in 3 of the cases of discontinued treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show favorable outcomes and well-tolerated adverse effects with broad-spectrum parenteral antibiotherapy for periprosthetic infection. However, every effort should be made to deescalate therapy by narrowing the spectrum or limiting the duration, to minimize adverse events and development of bacterial resistance. Treating surgeons need to carefully weigh benefits of therapy and be aware of potential complications that might necessitate discontinuation of treatment.

Microbiology of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Infections: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Postsurgical complications have been an increasing concern for hospitals, particularly in light of payment reform. The costs to the health care system are increasing in light of Medicare penalties for readmissions for certain conditions. Surgical site infection following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) remains challenging. The rates of positive cultures and isolated microorganisms in IBR are unknown. This systematic review summarizes the reported microorganisms and positive culture rates in the existing literature.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the guidelines outlined in Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Articles were included if breast implant infection rates and culture results were reported. Further subgroup analysis of culture positive infections was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies were included, encompassing 25,177 IBR. Implant infections were reported in 1356 reconstructions (5.4%). Cultures were positive in 74.5% of infections. Gram-positive bacteria were the most common (68.6%), of which Staphylococcus species (51%) was the most isolated pathogen, followed by Pseudomonas. A subgroup analysis showed that early infections (63% vs 88%), radiotherapy (82% vs 93%), and acellular dermal matrix use (90% vs 100%) were associated with lower positive culture rates than their respective counterparts. Patients who received chemotherapy had higher positive culture results (94% vs 83%). Isolated microorganisms also varied among the subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review outlines reported microorganisms in IBR. Staphylococcus species and Pseudomonas were the most frequently reported microorganism. Negative cultures were reported in up to 25.5% of infections. Patients with early infections, radiotherapy, and acellular dermal matrix demonstrated higher negative culture rates. This review can help guide the use of empirical antimicrobial therapy in IBR.

Management of Expander- and Implant-Associated Infections in Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic infection remains the most common complication after implant-based breast reconstruction. Objectives of the study were to (1) describe our clinical approach and treatment protocol for managing patients with suspected periprosthetic infection, (2) identify the microorganisms causing periprosthetic infections at our institute, and (3) report on outcomes of implant salvage versus explantation.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients who were treated with parenteral antibiotics for periprosthetic infection was carried out. Patient characteristics, clinical and laboratory findings, outcomes, treatment modalities and complications were extracted from electronic medical records. Data were compared between patients whose implants were salvaged versus explanted.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients with 67 tissue expander (TE)/implants underwent parenteral antibiotic treatment for suspected infection. Thirty-three (49%) of the TE/implants were salvaged. Mean follow-up was 14.3 months. The most commonly cultured organisms were P. aeruginosa followed by S. epidermidis. All suspected infections were treated with broad spectrum parenteral antibiotics with MRSA coverage. The most common combination was daptomycin 6 mg/kg combined with Zosyn 4.5 g. Explantations were significantly more common in patients with history of chemotherapy (p = 0.03), hypertension (p = 0.04) and those who underwent therapeutic mastectomy (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for explantation due to postoperative periprosthetic infections following TE/implant-based breast reconstruction include chemotherapy, hypertension and therapeutic mastectomy. Prompt diagnosis and effective treatment of periprosthetic infection, particularly in these high-risk patients, are imperative to salvage the breast reconstruction. Gram-negative bacteria are increasingly found in breast implant infections and should be covered when employing empiric antibiotherapy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Safety and Efficacy of Smooth Surface Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Traditional 2-stage breast reconstruction involves placement of a textured-surface tissue expander (TTE). Recent studies have demonstrated textured surface devices have higher propensity for bacterial contamination and biofilm formation.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of smooth surface tissue expanders (STE) in immediate breast reconstruction.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively reviewed consecutive women who underwent STE breast reconstruction from 2016 to 2017 at 3 institutions. Indications and outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total 112 patients underwent STE reconstruction (75 subpectoral, 37 prepectoral placement), receiving 173 devices and monitored for a mean follow-up of 14.1 months. Demographics of patients included average age of 53 years and average BMI of 27.2 kg/m2, and 18.6% received postmastectomy radiation therapy. Overall complication rates were 15.6% and included mastectomy skin flap necrosis (10.4%), seroma (5.2%), expander malposition (2.9%), and infection requiring intravenous antibiotic therapy (3.5%). Six (3.5%) unplanned reoperations with explantation were reported for 3 infections and 3 patients requesting change of plan with no reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

STEs represent a safe and efficacious alternative to TTE breast reconstruction with at least equitable outcomes. Technique modification including tab fixation, strict pocket control, postoperative bra support, and suture choice may contribute to observed favorable outcomes and are reviewed. Early results for infection control and explantation rate are encouraging and warrant comparative evaluation for potential superiority over TTEs in a prospective randomized trial.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Surgical Site Irrigation in Plastic Surgery

BACKGROUND

The incidence of infection following breast implant reconstruction remains high at the level of 24%. Surgical site irrigation is commonly used for its prevention. However, the lack of evidence-based guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis in breast implant surgery necessitates research for optimal irrigation technique.

OBJECTIVES

composition and exposure time of irrigation solution for surgical site infection (SSI) prophylaxis using an in vitro model of a surgical site.

METHODS

The study design was an in vitro model to assess antibiotic irrigation of a surgical site. Strains of Staphylococcus aureus, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Group A Streptococcus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were seeded on blood agar growth medium and irrigated with various antibiotic and antiseptic solutions under different exposure times. The presence and quantity of the colonies grown were estimated after 24-hour incubation. Repetition of the studies for 5 times with each investigated irrigation solution and microorganism was performed. Optimal irrigation agents were chosen based on the ability to achieve sterility with minimal tissue toxicity.

RESULTS

The optimal wound irrigation agents for SSI prophylaxis in our study were found to be 0.05% chlorhexidine or triple antibiotic antibiotic solutions. Adding of vancomycin to the irrigation solutions did not show an increase in their effectiveness. Prolonged irrigation exposure time was necessary to achieve sterility of the in vitro model of a surgical site.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend 0.05% chlorhexidine or triple antibiotic solution for topical SSI prophylaxis in breast implant surgery. Sufficient time of irrigation can be achieved by maintaining some of the solution in the pocket and delaying drainage for at least 30 minutes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5

Surveillance and Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Breast Oncologic Surgery with Immediate Reconstruction

Surgical site infection (SSI) after immediate breast reconstruction is much more common than would be expected after a clean surgical procedure. Although the SSI rates reported in individual studies are quite variable, there are no obvious explanations for the variation in infection rates between institutions. The microbiology of these SSIs is unusual, with higher proportions of infections caused by atypical Myobacterium species and Gram-negative bacilli than would be expected for this anatomic site. In an effort to prevent SSIs, many surgeons use a variety of different practices including irrigation and soaking of implants with antibiotic solutions and prolonged duration of prophylactic antibiotics, although the literature to support these practices is very sparse. In particular, prolonged use of antibiotics post-discharge is concerning due to the potential for harm, including increased risk of Clostridium difficile infection, development of antibiotic resistant organisms, and drug-related allergic reactions. With higher rates of mastectomy and breast implant reconstruction in women with early-stage breast cancer, including greater utilization of reconstruction in higher-risk individuals, the number of women suffering from infection after oncologic reconstruction will likely continue to increase. It is imperative that more research be done to identify modifiable factors associated with increased risk of infection. It is also essential that larger studies with rigorous study designs be performed to identify optimal strategies to decrease the risk of SSI in this vulnerable population.