ABSTRACT
Background@#Sternoclavicular joint (SCJ) osteomyelitis is a rare pathology requiring urgent intervention. Several operative approaches have been described with conflicting reports. Here, we present a multi-institutional study utilizing multiple surgical pathways for SCJ reconstruction. @*Methods@#A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify patients who underwent surgical repair for sternoclavicular osteomyelitis between 2008 and 2019. Patients were stratified according to reconstruction approach: single-stage reconstruction with advancement flap and delayed-reconstruction with flap following initial debridement. Demographics, operative approach, type of reconstruction, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. @*Results@#Thirty-two patients were identified. Mean patient age was 56.2±13.8 years and 68.8% were male. The average body mass index (BMI) was 30.0±8.8 kg/m2. The most common infection etiologies were intravenous drug use and bacteremia (both 25%). Fourteen patients (43.8%) underwent one-stage reconstruction and 18 (56.2%) underwent delayed twostaged reconstruction. Both single and delayed-stage groups had comparable rates of reinfection (7.1% vs. 11.1%, respectively), surgical site complications (21.4% vs. 27.8%), readmissions (7.1% vs. 16.6%), and reoperations (7.1% vs. 5.6%; all P>0.05). The single-stage reconstruction group had a significantly lower BMI (26.2±5.7 kg/m2 vs. 32.9±9.1 kg/m2; P<0.05) and trended towards shorter hospital length of stay (11.3 days vs. 17.9 days; P=0.01). @*Conclusions@#Both single and delayed-stage approaches are appropriate methods with comparable outcomes for reconstruction for SCJ osteomyelitis. When clinically indicated, a single-stage reconstruction approach may be preferable in order to avoid a second operation as associated with the delayed phase, and possibly shortening total hospital length of stay.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Perforator flaps minimize abdominal site morbidity during autologous breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to assess whether the number of perforators harvested influences the overall deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap survival and flap-related complications. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all DIEP flaps performed at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania from 2006 to 2011. The outcomes assessed included flap loss and major complications. We compared flaps by the number of total perforators (1-4) and then carried out a subgroup analysis comparing flaps with one perforator to flaps with multiple perforators. Lastly, we conducted a post-hoc analysis based on body mass index (BMI) categorization. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-three patients underwent 395 DIEP flaps. No significant differences were noted in the flap loss rate or the overall complications across perforator groups. However, the subgroup analysis revealed significantly higher rates of fat necrosis in the case of one-perforator flaps than in the case of multiple-perforator flaps (10.2% vs. 3.1%, P=0.009). The post-hoc analysis revealed a significant increase in the flap loss rate with increasing BMI (40=42.9%, P<0.001) in the DIEP flaps, but no increase in fat necrosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the number of perforators does not impact the rate of flap survival. However, the rate of fat necrosis may be significantly higher in DIEP flaps based on a single perforator. Multiple perforators should be utilized if possible to decrease the risk of fat necrosis.