The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on breast surgery in Italy: a multi-centric retrospective observational study.

COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on surgical activities. The aim of this multi-centric, retrospective study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast surgery. The patients who operated during the pre-pandemic year 2019 were compared to those operated in 2020. Fourteen Breast Care Units provided data on breast surgical procedures performed in 2020 and 2019: total number of breast-conserving surgery (BCS), number of 1st level oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS), number of 2nd level OBS; total number of mastectomies, mastectomies without reconstruction, mastectomies with a tissue expander, mastectomies with direct to implant (DTI) reconstruction, mastectomies with immediate flap reconstruction; total number of delayed reconstructions, number of expanders to implant reconstructions, number of delayed flap reconstructions. Overall 20.684 patients were included: 10.850 (52.5%) operated during 2019, and 9.834 (47.5%) during 2020. The overall number of breast oncologic surgical procedures in all centers in 2020 was 8.509, compared to 9.383 in 2019 (- 9%). BCS decreased by 744 cases (- 13%), the overall number of mastectomies decreased by 130 cases (- 3.5%); mastectomy-BCS ratio was 39-61% in 2019, and 42-58% in 2020. Regarding immediate reconstructive procedures mastectomies with DTI reconstruction increased by 166 cases (+ 15%) and mastectomies with immediate expander reconstruction decreased by 297 cases (- 20%). Breast-delayed reconstructive procedures in all centers in 2020 were 142 less than in 2019 (- 10%). The outburst of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 determined an implemented number of mastectomies compared to BCS, an implemented number of immediate breast reconstructions, mainly DTI, and a reduction of expander reconstruction.

Immediate Postmastectomy Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: An Outpatient Procedure?

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) poses unique challenges for breast reconstruction. At the authors' institution, COVID-19 postoperative protocols mandated patients undergoing immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction transition from 23-hour postoperative observation to same-day discharge. The authors sought to compare complications and hospital costs between these groups. METHODS: A retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction from March of 2019 to April of 2021 at an academic hospital was performed. Before mid-March of 2020, patients were admitted postoperatively for observation; after mid-March of 2020, patients were discharged the same day. Postoperative complications at 48 hours, 30 days, and 90 days and hospital costs were compared. RESULTS: There were 238 patients included (119 outpatient and 119 observation). Across all time points, total complications, major complications, categorical complications (wound healing, seroma, hematoma, infection, implant exposure), and reconstructive failures were low and not statistically different between groups. There were no differences in 30-day hospital readmission/reoperation rates (7.6% outpatient versus 9.2% observation; P = 0.640). No patient or surgical factors predicted major complication or hematoma by 48 hours or infection by 90 days. At 90 days, radiation history ( P = 0.002) and smoking ( P < 0.001) were significant predictors of major complications. Average patient care costs outside of surgery-specific costs were significantly lower for outpatients ($1509 versus $4045; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Complications after immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction are low. Outpatient surgery is safe, harboring no increased risk of complications. Furthermore, outpatient care is more cost-effective. Therefore, surgeons should consider outpatient management of these patients to minimize COVID-19 exposure and reduce resource consumption, all while maintaining excellent surgical care. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

A First Reported Adjustable Breast Volume Simulator for Teaching Oncoplastic Surgery Marking: Adjustable Breast Oncoplastic Surgery Simulator.

BACKGROUND: The current simulators for teaching oncoplastic surgery marking are available in a fixed size for each model. This is not an accurate reflection of the variety of patient's breast volumes in reality and may limit the teaching to certain techniques associated with the particular breast ptosis/size. DEVICE DESCRIPTION: This is the first reported simulator with varying breast volumes/ptosis in a single model for teaching oncoplastic surgery marking, known as Adjustable Breast Oncoplastic Surgery Simulator (ABOSS). Adjustable Breast Oncoplastic Surgery Simulator was created using 3D printing. PRELIMINARY RESULTS: Adjustable Breast Oncoplastic Surgery Simulator could simulate the breast in appearance and texture. It is inexpensive and allows the practice of various markings based on the different breast volumes/ptosis in a single model. It also allows for the practice of the marking needed in asymmetric breasts to correct the asymmetry. CURRENT STATUS: Plans for commercialisation were made.

One-Year Experience of Same-Day Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of same-day mastectomy with reconstruction has continued to increase across the United States in recent years. Prior studies have shown that same-day mastectomy with reconstruction leads to increased patient satisfaction and allows hospitals to use resources better. This study sought to evaluate the implementation of same-day mastectomy with a reconstruction recovery protocol for patients undergoing mastectomy at our institution. METHODS: Under an institutional review board-approved protocol, a retrospective cohort analysis compared patients who underwent mastectomy April 2016 through April 2017 with those who had mastectomy March 2020 through March 2021. Length of stay, postoperative intravenous (IV) opioid administration, safety end points, and cost were the main variables examined. RESULTS: The study compared 457 patients in 2016-2017 with 428 patients in 2020-2021. The median hospital length of stay decreased from 24.6 h in 2016-2017 to 5.5 h in 2020-2021 (p < 0.001). The percentage of patients requiring postoperative IV opioids decreased from 69.1 % in 2016-2017 to 50 % in 2020-2021 (p < 0.001). The rates of unplanned readmissions within 30 days after mastectomy did not differ between the two groups, with a rate of 3.7 % in 2016-2017 and a rate of 5.1 % in 2020-2021 (p = 0.30). Reducing the rate of overnight admissions after mastectomy by 65.8 % resulted in a cost reduction of 65.8 %. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of same-day mastectomy with a reconstruction protocol across a large academic center and two satellite sites was a safe alternative to conventional mastectomy recovery plans.

Patient perspectives on nipple-areola complex micropigmentation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Micropigmentation is a well-recognised option for nipple-areola complex reconstruction, as part of the breast reconstruction pathway for patients following mastectomy. As a part of delayed breast reconstruction, this treatment was put on hold during the COVID-19 pandemic. AIMS: To assess the views of patients regarding micropigmentation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and whether their attitudes to seeking out this part of the reconstructive journey had been altered. METHODS: A questionnaire undertaken with 53 patients between August & September 2020 attending the Micropigmentation clinic. FINDINGS: 81.1% of patients reported COVID-19 had not impacted their decision, with a similar proportion happy to proceed with the treatment at the time of questioning. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the importance of nipple-areola complex to our patients' reconstructive journey.

Patient-level costs of staged unilateral versus immediate bilateral symmetrization mammoplasty in breast-conserving surgery.

BACKGROUND: Following therapeutic mammoplasty (TM), the contralateral breast may require a later balancing procedure to optimize shape and symmetry. The alternative is to offer patients simultaneous TM with immediate contralateral symmetrization via a dual-surgeon approach, with the goal of reducing costs and minimizing the number of subsequent hospital appointments in an era of COVID-19 surges. The aim of this cost-consequence analysis is to characterize the cost-benefit of immediate bilateral symmetrization dual-operator mammoplasty versus staged unilateral single operator for breast cancer surgery. METHOD: A prospective single-centre observational study was conducted at an academic teaching centre for breast cancer surgery in the UK. Pseudonymized data for clinicopathological variables and procedural care information, including the type of initial breast-conserving surgery and subsequent reoperation(s), were extracted from the electronic patient record. Financial data were retrieved using the Patient-Level Information and Costing Systems. RESULTS: Between April 2014 and March 2020, 232 women received either immediate bilateral (n = 44), staged unilateral (n = 57) for breast cancer, or unilateral mammoplasty alone (n = 131). The median (interquartile range (i.q.r.)) additional cost of unilateral mammoplasty with staged versus immediate bilateral mammoplasty was €5500 (€4330 to €6570) per patient (P < 0.001), which represents a total supplementary financial burden of €313 462 to the study institution. There was no significant difference between groups in age, Charlson comorbidity index, operating minutes, time to adjuvant radiotherapy in months, or duration of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Synchronous dual-surgeon immediate bilateral TM can deliver safe immediate symmetrization and is financially beneficial, without delay to receipt of adjuvant therapy, or additional postoperative morbidity.

The benefits of dual-consultant operating in complex breast reconstruction: A retrospective cohort comparison study.

BACKGROUND: Dual-consultant operating (DCO) has been introduced in a multitude of surgical specialities. This retrospective cohort comparison study seeks to delineate any benefits DCO may confer on list utilisation, patient safety and training opportunities. METHODS: A retrospective cohort comparison of all free-flap breast reconstruction cases conducted at a single centre by five consultant plastic surgeons in the period May 2016-May 2020. RESULTS: A total of 281 patient records were used for analysis; 146 cases were dual consultants compared with 135 single consultants, representing 186 and 158 free flaps, respectively. Patient demographics were near identical in terms of patient age, BMI and ASA grade. Operating times were significantly reduced for both unilateral (mean reduction 59.49 min) and bilateral cases (mean reduction 38.14 min) with the presence of dual consultants. The mean length of stay for dual-consultant cases was on average 0.35 days less than for single consultant cases (p = 0.04). Dual-consultant case complications were less severe than those of single consultant cases (mean Clavien-Dindo severity 1.35 vs 0.96, p = 0.05). The rates of trainee one-to-one consultant training were increased in dual-consultant cases when preparing vessels (0.08 vs 0.35, p=<0.01) and performing anastomosis (0.63 vs 0.77, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: DCO for complex breast reconstruction confers significant benefits to operating time, list utility and patient safety whilst protecting training opportunities for trainees. Plastic surgery departments looking to redesign services in the post-SARS-CoV-19 era should consider its adoption into their enhanced recovery protocols.

Effects of COVID-19 on mastectomy and breast reconstruction rates: A national surgical sample.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted breast cancer treatment in 2020. Guidelines initially halted elective procedures, subsequently encouraging less invasive surgeries and restricting breast reconstruction options. We examined the effects of COVID-19 on oncologic breast surgery and reconstruction rates during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, we performed an observational examination of female surgical breast cancer patients from 2017 to 2020. We analyzed annual rates of lumpectomy, mastectomy (unilateral/contralateral prophylactic/bilateral prophylactic), and breast reconstruction (alloplastic/autologous) and compared 2019 and 2020 reconstruction cohorts to evaluate the effect of COVID-19. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2020, 175 949 patients underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without reconstruction. From 2019 to 2020, patient volume declined by 10.7%, unilateral mastectomy rates increased (70.5% to 71.9%, p = 0.003), and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates decreased. While overall reconstruction rates were unchanged, tissue expander reconstruction increased (64.0% to 68.4%, p < 0.001) and direct-to-implant and autologous reconstruction decreased. Outpatient alloplastic reconstruction increased (65.7% to 73.8%, p < 0.0001), and length of hospital stay decreased for all reconstruction patients (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In 2020, there was a nearly 11% decline in breast cancer surgeries, comparable mastectomy and reconstruction rates, increased use of outpatient alloplastic reconstruction, and significantly reduced in-hospital time across all reconstruction types.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on alloplastic breast reconstruction: An analysis of national outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Immediate alloplastic breast reconstruction shifted to the outpatient setting during the COVID-19 pandemic to conserve inpatient hospital beds while providing timely oncologic care. We examine the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database for trends in and safety of outpatient breast reconstruction during the pandemic. METHODS: NSQIP data were filtered for immediate alloplastic breast reconstructions between April and December of 2019 (before-COVID) and 2020 (during-COVID); the proportion of outpatient procedures was compared. Thirty-day complications were compared for noninferiority between propensity-matched outpatients and inpatients utilizing a 1% risk difference margin. RESULTS: During COVID, immediate alloplastic breast reconstruction cases decreased (4083 vs. 4677) and were more frequently outpatient (31% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). Outpatients had lower rates of smoking (6.8% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.03) and obesity (26% vs. 33%, p < 0.001). Surgical complication rates of outpatient procedures were noninferior to propensity-matched inpatients (5.0% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.03 noninferiority). Reoperation rates were lower in propensity-matched outpatients (5.2% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Immediate alloplastic breast reconstruction shifted towards outpatient procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic with noninferior complication rates. Therefore, a paradigm shift towards outpatient reconstruction for certain patients may be safe. However, decreased reoperations in outpatients may represent undiagnosed complications and warrant further investigation.

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

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic dramatically changed the delivery of breast cancer care. The objective of this study was to quantify the effect of the pandemic on breast cancer screening, treatment, and reconstruction at a single institution in New York City. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted to determine the number of mammograms, lumpectomies, mastectomies, and breast reconstruction operations performed between January 1, 2019 and June 30, 2021. Outcomes analyzed included changes in mammography, oncologic surgery, and breast reconstruction surgery volume before, during and after the start of the pandemic. RESULTS: Mammography volume declined by 11% in March-May of 2020. Oncologic breast surgeries and reconstructive surgeries similarly declined by 6.8% and 11%, respectively, in 2020 compared with 2019, reaching their lowest levels in April 2020. The volume of all procedures increased during the summer of 2020. Mammography volumes in June and July 2020 were found to be at pre-COVID levels, and in October-December 2020 were 15% higher than in 2019. Oncologic breast surgeries saw a similar rebound in May 2020, with 24.6% more cases performed compared with May 2019. Breast reconstruction volumes increased, though changes in the types of reconstruction were noted. Oncoplastic closures were more common during the pandemic, while two-stage implant reconstruction and immediate autologous reconstruction decreased by 27% and 43%, respectively. All procedures are on track to increase in volume in 2021 compared to that in 2020. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic reduced the volume of breast cancer surveillance, surgical treatment, and reconstruction procedures. While it is reassuring that volumes have rebounded in 2021, efforts must be made to emphasize screening and treatment procedures in the face of subsequent surges, such as that recently attributable to the Delta and Omicron variants.

The safety of performing breast reconstruction during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Elective operations including surgeries for breast cancer were significantly reduced during the height of the surge of COVID-19 cases in Massachusetts. The safety of performing breast reconstruction during the pandemic was unknown. This study aims to review the safety of performing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction during the first COVID-19 surge in Massachusetts. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction by Massachusetts General Hospital breast and plastic surgeons immediately preceding and during the COVID-19 pandemic was performed. RESULTS: Thirty patients (34 breasts) underwent mastectomies with immediate breast reconstruction during the COVID-19 restriction period in Massachusetts. Most reconstructions were unilateral. All reconstructions were performed with implants or expanders, and no autologous reconstructions were performed. Two patients (2 breasts) had operative complications. The complication rate during the pandemic was similar to the complication rate pre-pandemic. No patients or surgeons experienced symptoms or positive COVID-19 tests. Over 90% of patients were discharged the same day. CONCLUSION: Prosthetic breast reconstruction was able to be performed safely during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic surge in Massachusetts. Strict screening protocols, proper use of personal protective equipment, and same-day discharge when possible are essential for patient and surgeon safety during the pandemic.

Microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction in the midst of a pandemic: A single-unit COVID-19 experience.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has disrupted the provision of breast reconstructive services throughout the UK. Autologous free flap breast reconstruction was restarted in our unit on 3 June 2020. We aimed to compare the unit's performance of microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction in the "post-COVID" period compared with the exact time period in the preceding year. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data in the "pre-COVID" (from 3 June 2019 to 31 December 2019) and "post-COVID" period (from 3 June 2020 to 31 December 2020). Patient demographics included age, body mass index, co-morbidities, Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade and smoking status. Surgical factors included neoadjuvant chemotherapy, previous chest wall radiotherapy, unilateral or bilateral reconstruction, reconstruction timing, number of pedicles, contralateral symmetrisation and other procedures. dependant variables were ischaemic time, operative time, mastectomy weight, flap weight, length of stay, return to theatre and complication rates. The number of trainers and trainees present in theatre was recorded and analysed. RESULTS: Fewer DIEP flaps were performed in the "post-COVID" period (45 vs. 29). No significant difference was observed in mastectomy resection weight, but flap weight was significantly increased. No significant difference was found in ischaemic time as well. The postoperative length of stay was significantly reduced. No significant difference was found in rates of return to theatre, unplanned admission, infection, haematoma, seroma or wound dehiscence. No cases of venous thromboembolism or flap failures were recorded. The mean number of trainers and trainees, and the trainee-to-trainer ratio was not found to be significantly different between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Although fewer cases were performed, autologous breast reconstruction was safely delivered throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in the first wave without affecting training.

Breast reconstruction during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has changed people's way of life and posed great challenges to plastic surgery. Most of plastic surgeries are considered elective surgeries and are recommended to be delayed. But breast reconstruction in plastic surgery is special. Doctors' associations from different countries have different rules on whether breast reconstruction surgery should be delayed. For the controversial topic of immediate breast reconstruction in the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted this study. METHODS: We searched English databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The publication time of papers was set to be from the establishment of the databases to February 2021. All studies on immediate breast reconstruction in the COVID-19 pandemic were included in our study. RESULTS: A total of 6 studies were included in this study. Four studies recommended the use of breast implants or tissue expansion for breast reconstruction surgery and had good results in their clinical practice. In addition, 1 study planned to use autologous free tissue transfer for breast reconstruction, and 1 study planned to use microsurgical techniques for breast reconstruction. But these 2 technologies are still in the planning stage and have not yet been implemented. CONCLUSIONS: In our opinion, breast cancer surgery belongs to confine operation, and breast reconstruction surgery should be performed immediately after the completion of breast cancer surgery. We recommend the use of breast implants for breast reconstruction surgery during the COVID-19 epidemic. Due to the limitations of the study, our proposed protocol for breast reconstruction surgery during the COVID-19 epidemic needs to be further validated in clinical studies.

Day-case approach to immediate breast reconstruction: pushing the boundaries of ambulatory breast surgery in the post-COVID-19 era.

INTRODUCTION: Day-case surgery is safe and efficacious for most breast surgical procedures. Limited data exist on its use in immediate breast reconstruction. We present our experience of day-case management of mastectomy with immediate pre-pectoral implant-based reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: Data were collected on 47 patients who underwent day-case skin-sparing (SSM) or nipple-sparing (NSM) mastectomy with pre-pectoral IBR between October 2017 and September 2019. Clinicopathological data were collected, including postoperative complications, re-admission and re-operation. The data were compared to published national standards. RESULTS: Median age was 52 years (range 37-74). Thirty-two patients (68%) had an SSM and 15 (32%) had an NSM. Two patients (4%) had risk-reducing mastectomies and 45 had treatment for invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Mean tumour size was 33.3mm (range 7-85mm). Forty-two (89%) patients went home on the day of surgery. No patients required re-operation in the first 48 hours. The median postoperative follow-up time was 11.4 months (range 1.8-22.7 months). During the first 90-day postoperative period, eight patients (17%) developed superficial skin necrosis, five patients (10.6%) developed postoperative infections and five patients (10.6%) suffered an implant loss. Eight patients (17%) were readmitted for re-operation. Compared to UK national standards set in the iBRA study, our cohort has demonstrated comparable postoperative infection, implant loss and re-operation and re-admission rates. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated close to 90% day-case success rate for mastectomy with IBR. These early data suggest that immediate IBR can be carried out in a manner that is cost-efficient without impacting surgical outcomes.

Use of Tumescent Anesthesia in Surgical Excision of Gynecomastia.

Background. Gynecomastia, benign enlargement of the male breast is the most common breast pathology amongst males. The most widely used modality of treatment is liposuction under general anesthesia. To date however there is no published study that specifically addresses to use tumescent anesthesia & use of tranexamic acid in it for excision of gynecomastia. Objective. To evaluate the efficacy of tumescent anesthesia in surgical excision of gynecomastia. Methods. A 4-year study with 100 patients of gynecomastia aged 14 to 47 years were enrolled with follow up for 3 months. All patients were given tumescence anesthesia in each breast comprising subcutaneous infiltration of 500 ml RL, 20 ml 0.5% bupivacaine, 30 ml 2% lignocaine, 1 mg adrenaline & 1 gm tranexamic acid. Breast tissue was excised in each breast by a single infraareolar incision & patients were assessed for intra-op pain and post-op pain by using numeric rating scale (NRS). Results. Bilateral presentation was there in 69 patients and 31 unilateral with 4 recurrent cases. Size of gland excised were 12-14 cms in 53 cases, 15-18 cms in 38 & 19-20 cms in 9 patients. Average surgical time required for each breast was 30 minutes. Intraoperative pain NRS-0 for 66, NRS-1 for 31 & NRS-5 for 03 patients. Postoperative pain for first eight hours was NRS-0 for 69 and NRS-1 for 31 patients. Conclusion. Tumescent anaesthesia for surgical excision of gynecomastia using a periareolar incision is a minimally invasive bloodless and painless technique in which ductal and stromal tissue can be removed resulting in a high level of patient satisfaction. In todays covid era it avoids the use of general anesthesia and electrocautery.

Breast reconstruction with immediate autologous free tissue transfer in a peri-operative COVID-19 positive patient: A case report illustrating feasibility of aftercare.

Globally, there has been a measured response to rationalise elective operating during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In terms of breast cancer care, this has led to a restricted provision of reconstruction with autologous free tissue transfer. A primary concern is the risk of mortality in elective surgery patients who develop COVID-19. The aim of this report is to describe the observed physiological impact of the virus on our patient, and to address how outpatient care after autologous free tissue transfer can be delivered to COVID-19 positive patients. In March 2020, we performed a bilateral breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap and a superficial inferior epigastric perforator flap. The patient became symptomatic on day three post-operatively, tested positive for COVID-19 and was discharged home. Drain and dressing management was continued through the use of telemedicine. Two weeks following the operation, a breast seroma formed that was drained semi-electively in the COVID-19 positive area of the Emergency Department. The patient visited the dressing clinic twice in total and healed after three weeks. Despite undergoing complex surgery and having pre-operative chemotherapy, our patient suffered a mild form of the virus limited to upper respiratory symptoms. Physiologically we did not see any significant difference to that of the normal post-operative course. This case demonstrates the possibility of managing autologous breast reconstruction patients using telemedicine. Although COVID-19 can complicate, or even be fatal, in the perioperative course, our patient thankfully suffered no discernable negative outcome from her infection.

Restitution of the NHS breast reconstruction service during the recovery phase of the Covid 19 pandemic.

During the recovery restitution phase of the coronavirus pandemic, breast reconstruction teams have faced particular challenges to restarting this essential service. This is due to the length and complexity of the surgery, along with the demands on healthcare staff. The Royal College of Surgeons have classified immediate breast reconstruction as priority 2 and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence have provided a pre-operative pathway for resumption of elective procedures. We therefore describe our experience in restarting our service for providing a breast reconstruction service from the 29th June 2020.