The effect of prior abdominal surgery on abdominally based free flaps in breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The abdomen has long remained the preferred donor site in breast reconstruction. Over time, the flap has evolved to limit morbidity with reduced muscular harvest. Previous abdominal operations, however, may limit the ability to perform a muscle- or fascia-sparing flap. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes in women who had prior abdominal operations and underwent abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction. METHODS: All patients who underwent abdominally based breast free flap reconstruction between 2004 and 2009 were reviewed. A study group of patients with previous open abdominal surgery were compared to patients with no prior abdominal surgery. Patient demographics, operative details, and flap and donor-site complications were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 539 patients underwent abdominally based breast free flap reconstruction. The study group consisted of 268 patients (341 flaps) and the control group consisted of 271 patients (351 flaps). Prior abdominal surgery led to greater muscular harvest, as 19.9 percent in the study group versus 12.0 percent required muscle-sparing 1-type harvest (p < 0.01). Both groups presented similar overall complications, with the exception of lower partial flap loss and increased wound healing complications in the study group (p < 0.05). Abdominal wall laxity became less frequent with increasing number of prior abdominal operations. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominally based flaps for breast reconstruction, including muscle-sparing 3 (deep inferior epigastric perforator) flaps, can be performed safely in patients with prior abdominal surgery. These patients should be informed, however, of an increased chance of muscular harvest and wound healing complications. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Factors influencing patient interest in plastic surgery and the process of selecting a surgeon.

BACKGROUND: Understanding patient interest in cosmetic surgery is an important tool in delineating the current market for aesthetic surgeons. Similarly, defining those factors that most influence surgeon selection is vital for optimizing marketing strategies. OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluate a general population sample's interest in cosmetic surgery and investigate which factors patients value when selecting their surgeon. METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was distributed to 96 individuals in waiting rooms in nonsurgical clinics. Respondents were questioned on their ability to differentiate between a "plastic" surgeon and a "cosmetic" surgeon, their interest in having plastic surgery, and factors affecting surgeon and practice selection. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to define any significant correlative relationships. RESULTS: Respondents consisted of 15 men and 81 women. Median age was 34.5 (range, 18-67) years. Overall, 20% were currently considering plastic surgery and 78% stated they would consider it in the future. The most common area of interest was a procedure for the face. The most important factors in selecting a surgeon were surgeon reputation and board certification. The least important were quality of advertising and surgeon age. The most cited factor preventing individuals from pursuing plastic surgery was fear of a poor result. Most (60%) patients would choose a private surgicenter-based practice. CONCLUSIONS: The level of importance for each studied attribute can help plastic surgeons understand the market for cosmetic surgery as well as what patients look for when selecting their surgeon. This study helps to define those attributes in a sample population.