A Comparison of Surgical Complications in Patients Undergoing Delayed versus Staged Tissue-Expander and Free-Flap Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing mastectomy may not be candidates for immediate free-flap breast reconstruction because of medical comorbidities or postmastectomy radiation therapy. In this setting, flap reconstruction may be intentionally delayed or staged with tissue expander placement ("delayed-immediate" reconstruction). The optimal reconstructive choice and incidence of complications for these approaches remain unclear. METHODS: The authors retrospectively identified patients who underwent delayed [n = 140 (72 percent)] or staged [n = 54 (28 percent)] abdominal free-flap breast reconstruction between 2010 and 2018 and compared the incidence of postoperative complications. RESULTS: Patients undergoing staged reconstruction had a higher overall incidence of perioperative complications, including surgical-site infection (40.7 percent versus 6.5 percent; p < 0.001), wound healing complications (29.6 percent versus 12.3 percent; p = 0.004), hematoma (11.1 percent versus 0.7 percent; p < 0.001), and return to the operating room (27.8 percent versus 4.4 percent; p < 0.0001). These complications occurred predominately during the expansion stage, resulting in an 18.5 percent (n = 10) rate of tissue expander failure. Mean time from mastectomy to flap reconstruction was 476.8 days (delayed, 536.4 days; staged, 322.4 days; p < 0.001). At the time of flap reconstruction, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the staged cohort versus the delayed cohort, including microsurgical complications (1.9 percent versus 4.3 percent; p = 0.415), total flap loss (0 percent versus 2.1 percent; p = 0.278), or fat necrosis (5.6 percent versus 5.0 percent; p = 0.875). CONCLUSIONS: The aesthetic and psychosocial benefits of staged free-flap breast reconstruction should be balanced with the increased risk of perioperative complications as compared to a delayed approach. Complications related to definitive flap reconstruction do not appear to be affected by the approach taken at the time of mastectomy. . CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Assessing the Influence of Attending Surgeon Continuity on Free Flap Outcomes Following Unplanned Returns to the Operating Room.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned returns to the operating room (OR) may be necessary at times to salvage a compromised free flap. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of attending surgeon continuity on free flap outcomes following a return to the OR. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent free flap reconstruction and experienced an unplanned return to the OR within 30 days from 2002 to 2017. Logistic regression modeling was used to determine factors that predict unplanned returns to the OR. RESULTS: Of the 1,177 patients were identified, 267 (22.5%) had an unplanned return to the OR. Of these, 69 (5.9%) patients experienced total flap loss. Overall, 216 take-back procedures were performed by the primary surgeons (80.2%), while 50 were performed by covering surgeons (18.8%). Flap loss occurred more frequently during a weekend procedure (p = 0.013). Additionally, when the take-back procedure was performed within 5 days of the original surgery by the primary as opposed to a covering surgeon, patients experienced lower estimated blood loss (75 vs. 150 cc, p = 0.04). Overall, there was a significantly lower incidence of flap loss when the take-back procedure was performed by the primary, as opposed to the covering, surgeon (20 vs. 47%, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Higher rates of flap loss occur when a covering surgeon performs a take-back procedure in comparison to the primary surgeon. It is important to ensure the availability of the primary surgeon in the first few postoperative days following free flap reconstruction. When transfer of care is necessary, photographic or video documentation of the microvascular anastomosis may be helpful in addition to a verbal sign out.

Assessing the Relationship between Anxiety and Revision Surgery following Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Revision procedures address contour irregularities and aesthetic concerns following autologous breast reconstruction. Mental health diagnoses are known to influence patient satisfaction with reconstruction. The authors aimed to identify oncologic, reconstructive, and demographic factors, including mental health diagnoses, associated with the number of revisions after autologous breast reconstruction. METHODS: The medical records of all adult women undergoing abdominal free flap-based breast reconstruction at a major academic institution between 2011 and 2016 were reviewed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with receipt of revisions. Negative binomial regression was used to identify characteristics associated with number of revisions received. RESULTS: Of 272 patients identified, 55.2 percent received one revision, 23.2 percent received two revisions, and 10.3 percent received three or more revisions after autologous breast reconstruction (median, one; range, zero to five). After adjustment on multivariate analysis, anxiety (OR, 4.34; p = 0.016) and bilateral reconstruction (OR, 3.10; p = 0.017) were associated with receipt of any revisions; other oncologic and reconstructive factors including breast cancer stage, receipt of radiation therapy, and type or timing of free flap reconstruction were not associated with revisions. Using univariate negative binomial regression, anxiety (incidence rate ratio, 1.34; p = 0.006), Caucasian race (incidence rate ratio, 1.24; p = 0.02), and bilateral reconstruction (incidence rate ratio, 1.39; p = 0.04) were predictive of increased numbers of revisions received. After stepwise selection on multivariate analysis, anxiety remained the only significant predictor of increased numbers of revisions. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative anxiety significantly influences the number of revisions after autologous breast reconstruction. Further research is necessary to better understand the interplay among mental health, patient preference, and outcomes in breast reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Decline in Racial Disparities in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Analysis from 1998 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing emphasis on reducing racial disparities in breast cancer care in the United States, it remains unknown whether access to breast reconstruction has improved over time. The authors characterized contemporary patterns of breast reconstruction by race and ethnicity. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was used to identify women undergoing mastectomy for stage 0 to III breast cancer from 1998 to 2014. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association of demographic factors with likelihood of postmastectomy reconstruction. Multivariable logistic regression was used to predict reconstruction subtype. Patients undergoing reconstruction were grouped by diagnosis year to assess change in the population over time by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Of 346,418 patients, 21.8 percent underwent immediate reconstruction. Non-Hispanic black race (OR, 0.71) and Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 0.63) were associated with a decreased likelihood of reconstruction (all p < 0.001). Race was predictive of reconstruction type, with non-Hispanic black (OR, 1.52) and Hispanic women (OR, 1.22) more likely to undergo autologous versus implant-based reconstruction (p < 0.001). Although rates of reconstruction increased over time across all races, non-Hispanic black and Hispanic patients had a higher adjusted per-year increase in rate of reconstruction compared with non-Hispanic white patients (interaction p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of postmastectomy reconstruction have increased more quickly over time for minority women compared with white women, suggesting that racial disparities in breast reconstruction may be improving. However, race continues to be associated with differences in types and rates of reconstruction. Further research is necessary to continue to improve access to breast reconstruction in the United States. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

A Multicenter Analysis Examining Patients Undergoing Conversion of Implant-based Breast Reconstruction to Abdominally based Free Tissue Transfer.

BACKGROUND: Breast implant placement is the most common method for postmastectomy reconstruction. For patients who develop complications associated with implant-based reconstruction, additional surgeries may be challenging. This study examined implant-based reconstruction failure in patients undergoing salvage with abdominal free tissue transfer. METHODS: We conducted an Institutional Review Board approved, multicenter retrospective study of patients with implant-based primary breast reconstruction followed by implant removal and subsequent abdominal free tissue transfer between 2006 and 2016. Patient demographics, treatment details, and complications were evaluated. Severity of implant failure was graded as either (1) not severe (delayed salvage reconstruction) or (2) severe (immediate salvage reconstruction). RESULTS: Between 2006 and 2016, 115 patients with 180 mastectomy defects underwent primary implant-based reconstruction with subsequent implant removal and abdominally based free tissue reconstruction. Of these, 68 were delayed and 47 were immediate salvage reconstruction. Factors leading to elective removal were capsular contracture, asymmetry, and implant malposition. Factors leading to obligatory removal were infection, delayed wound healing, and implant extrusion. Postmastectomy radiation was significantly associated with immediate salvage reconstruction (p < 0.001, odds ratio = 3.9) as were large volume implants (p = 0.06). Deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps comprised 78.3% of all abdominally based free tissue reconstructions, while muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominus myocutaneous flaps comprised 18.3%. Overall flap failure rate was 2.6% (2.94% delayed and 2.13% immediate salvage reconstruction; p = 1.0). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that abdominal free tissue transfer remains a safe and effective salvage modality for implant-based breast reconstruction failure. Patients with severe implant failure were more likely to have received radiation. Surgeons should remain cognizant of this during care of patients.