Survival outcomes of anal adenocarcinoma versus rectal adenocarcinoma: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anal adenocarcinoma (AA) is a rare malignancy with decreased survival compared to rectal adenocarcinoma (RA). However, AA continues to be treated with similar algorithms compared to rectal cancer with minimal data regarding the efficacy of these treatment algorithms. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients with non-metastatic AA at a single tertiary-care institution from 1995 to 2020. This cohort was matched 2:1 to a group of RA patients for comparison. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival rates. RESULTS: Sixteen patients with stages I-III AA were matched to a cohort of RA. There were no significant differences between the cohorts with regard to patient demographics, comorbidities, disease stage or histologic features. There were also no significant differences in treatment modalities between the two cohorts with a majority undergoing multimodal therapy with chemoradiation and surgery. All patients with AA demonstrated significantly worse survival than all patients with rectal adenocarcinoma (five-year survival 47.7% vs. 82.3%, respectively. p < 0.05). When looking at a sub-group of patients who underwent combination chemoradiation and surgery from each cohort, anal adenocarcinoma continued to exhibit lower overall survival (five-year survival 41.6% and 86.4%, respectively. p < 0.05). In a multi-variable model that adjusted for location, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage and treatment pathway, tumor location in the anal canal was an independent predictor of overall survival (Hazard ratio [HR] 2.7, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: AA has worse survival as compared to RA despite similar treatment. This study highlights the need to evaluate the current classification and treatment pathways to improve outcomes.

Comparison of Tumescent Anesthesia Versus Pectoral Nerve Block in Bilateral Reduction Mammaplasty.

INTRODUCTION: With an increasing focus on multimodal pain control to reduce opioid requirements, regional and local anesthesia techniques have been investigated in bilateral reduction mammaplasty with variable results. The purpose of this study is to compare tumescent anesthesia with pectoral nerve block II (PECS II) in patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty with respect to postoperative pain and nausea, opioid consumption, length of stay, and cost. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty for macromastia between November 2020 and December 2021 was performed. Demographic information, operative and anesthesia times, antiemetic and morphine equivalent requirements, postoperative numeric pain rating scales, and time until hospital discharge were compared between groups. χ2 and Fisher exact tests examined subgroup differences in categorical variables. Two-sample t test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test evaluated differences in continuous parametric and nonparametric variables, respectively. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent bilateral reduction mammaplasty by 3 surgeons, 71.7% (n = 38) with tumescent anesthesia infiltrated by the operating surgeon before the start of the procedure and 28.3% (n = 15) with bilateral PECS II blocks performed by anesthesia before the start of the procedure. There was no difference in age, body mass index, weight resected, intraoperative medication, or immediate postoperative complications. Postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements were similar between the 2 groups. Twenty-one percent (n = 8) of tumescent patients compared with 66.7% (n = 10) of block patients required 1 or more doses of postoperative antiemetics ( P = 0.002). Patients who received blocks spent longer in the postoperative recovery area (5.3 vs 7.1 hours, P < 0.01). However, this did not translate to a significant increase in overnight stays. The block group had significantly higher hospitalization cost by an average of $4000, driven by pharmacy and procedural cost ( P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of multimodal perioperative pain-controlled reduction mammaplasty patients, tumescent anesthesia was associated with decreased antiemetic requirements, less time in recovery before discharge, and lower cost compared with PECS II blocks. Therefore, tumescent anesthesia may be favored over PECS II blocks when considering multimodal pain control strategies in reduction mammaplasty patients.

A Descriptive Analysis of Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Program Directors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The role sex plays in surgical leadership positions is heavily discussed in the literature; however, there is an absence of research looking at plastic surgery program director (PD) demographics and the differences between male and female PDs. METHODS: A cross sectional study of publicly available online resources of all integrated plastic surgery residency programs was performed. Demographic and academic data of integrated plastic surgery PDs was analyzed focusing on the differences in PDs based on sex. RESULTS: Eighty-two integrated plastic surgery residencies were analyzed. Fifteen PDs (18.3%) were female. Fifty-six (68%) PDs completed general surgery residencies, whereas 24 (29%) completed an integrated plastics residency. All female PDs were fellowship trained, whereas only 46 (68%) male PDs pursued additional training after residency ( P = 0.02). Research output among male PDs was greater with 49.9 publications and a higher average H-index, at 13.3, compared with women with an average of 27.5 publications ( P = 0.008) and an H-index of 8.7 ( P = 0.02). When comparing male to female PDs, there was no difference between age at PD appointment ( P = 0.15), or in the amount of time between completion of plastic surgery training to PD appointment ( P = 0.29). Male PDs were older (52.2) compared with female PDs (46.5) ( P = 0.02). Male PDs served longer terms (4.98 years) than female PDs (2.87 years) ( P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of integrated plastic surgery PDs are men with a Doctor of Medicine degree who completed a general surgery residency and a plastic surgery fellowship. Most PDs also completed fellowship in a plastic subspecialty. Male PDs had higher research output, which may be attributed to their older age on average. Although women make up only 18.3% of plastic surgery PDs, this percentage is similar to the 17.2% of active female plastic surgeons in the United States. As more women train in plastic surgery, it is possible that the percentage of women serving academic leadership roles will increase. By gaining a better understanding of the demographics and diversity in plastic surgery residency program leadership, efforts can be made to increase the representation of minority groups in academic leadership roles.

Smooth Versus Textured Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: Complications and Efficacy.

INTRODUCTION: Ongoing recognition of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) and its link with textured devices has brought a paradigm shift in prosthetic-based breast reconstruction. Many institutions no longer offer textured expansion devices for staged reconstruction. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of smooth tissue expanders (TE). We hypothesized that the time to final reconstruction and complication profile between smooth and textured TEs would be similar in breast reconstruction patients. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients who underwent TE breast reconstruction during a 6-year period at the Penn State Hershey Medical Center. Rates of complications treated nonoperatively and those requiring reoperation were assessed. Mechanical complications, including expander malposition and rupture, were evaluated. Time to final breast reconstruction was quantified. Mixed-effects logistic regression and linear regression models, as appropriate, were used to compare textured to smooth TEs. Patient characteristics and anatomic plane placement were adjusted for in all analyses of outcomes. RESULTS: Data were collected on 389 patients, encompassing 140 smooth and 604 textured TEs. Textured devices had an increased incidence of complications treated nonsurgically (16.7% vs 10.7%; P = 0.14). However, smooth TEs had an increased incidence of reoperation (12.1% vs 7.6%; P = 0.06). Most noteworthy was that although smooth TEs had a 40-fold increase in malposition (13.6% vs 0.3%; P < 0.001), no reoperation for this complication was warranted. Further, the time to final reconstruction was comparable between the 2 devices (textured expanders: 221 days and smooth expanders: 234 days; P = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Staged, implant-based reconstruction is the most common surgical approach to recreate the breast mound following mastectomy. Textured TEs were the cornerstone to this approach. Unfortunately, the association between textured devices and BIA-ALCL now mandates an alternative. We postulated that smooth expanders would compare favorably for breast reconstruction. Although our study suggests that smooth TEs suffer more malposition, this has a negligible impact on the reconstructive timeline. Thus, smooth TEs may prove beneficial when considering the risk of BIA-ALCL associated with textured devices.