The value of microvascular breast reconstruction: Cost equivalence of TRAM and DIEP flaps implications in the era of CMS reforms.

BACKGROUND: Recent CMS billing changes have raised concerns about insurance coverage for deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. This study compared the costs and utilization of transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM), DIEP, and latissimus dorsi (LD) flaps in breast reconstruction. METHOD: The study utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to identify female patients who underwent DIEP, TRAM, and LD flap procedures from 2016 to 2019. Key data such as patient demographics, length of stay, complications, and costs (adjusted to 2021 USD) were analyzed, focusing on differences across the flap types. RESULTS: A total of 17,770 weighted patient encounters were identified, with the median age being 51. The majority underwent DIEP flaps (73.5%), followed by TRAM (14.2%) and LD (12.1%) flaps. The findings revealed that DIEP and TRAM flaps had a similar length of stay (LOS), while LD flaps typically had a shorter LOS. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio were also comparable between DIEP and TRAM flaps, whereas LD flaps were significantly less expensive. Factors such as income quartile, primary payer of hospitalization, and geographic region significantly influenced flap choice. CONCLUSION: The study's results appear to contradict the prevailing notion that TRAM flaps are more cost-effective than DIEP flaps. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio and hospital stays associated with TRAM and DIEP flaps were found to be similar. These findings suggest that changes in the insurance landscape, which may limit the use of DIEP flaps, could undermine patient autonomy while not necessarily reducing healthcare costs. Such policy shifts could favor less costly options like the LD flap, potentially altering the landscape of microvascular breast reconstruction.

Redefining Surgical Materials: Applications of Silk Fibroin in Osteofixation and Fracture Repair.

Silk and silk derivatives have emerged as a possible alternative in surgical device development, offering mechanical strength, biocompatibility, and environmental sustainability. Through a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, this study evaluated silk fibroin's application across pre-clinical and clinical settings, focusing on its role as screws and plates for osteofixation. A comprehensive search yielded 245 studies, with 33 subjected to full-text review and 15 ultimately included for qualitative analysis. The findings underscore silk fibroin's superior properties, including its tunable degradation rates and ability to be functionalized with therapeutic agents. In vivo and in vitro studies demonstrated its efficacy in enhancing bone healing, offering improved outcomes in osteofixation, particularly for craniofacial defects. Silk fibroin's remarkable attributes in biodegradation and drug release capabilities underscore its potential to enhance patient care. Ultimately, silk fibroin's integration into surgical practices promises a revolution in patient outcomes and environmental sustainability. Its versatility, coupled with the continuous progress in fabrication techniques, signals a promising horizon for its widespread acceptance in the medical field, potentially establishing a new benchmark in surgical treatment. Further research is expected to solidify the transition of silk products from basic science to patient care, paving the way for widespread use in various surgical applications.

Management of Superficial and Deep Peroneal Nerve Neuromas with Targeted Muscle Reinnervation in Nonamputees: Operative Technique and Early Outcomes.

Background: Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR), a surgical technique developed by the senior authors that coapts proximal ends of nerves to distal motor nerves of adjacent muscles, has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment and prevention of neuroma pain. The objective of this study is to describe the surgical technique for TMR of the superficial peroneal nerve (SPN) and deep peroneal nerve (DPN) in nonamputee patients and provide data on postoperative functional outcomes. Methods: A single-institution retrospective chart review was performed between March 2018 and April 2021. Patients were de-identified and included if they were nonamputees receiving TMR for pain in the peroneal nerve distribution. Data extracted included demographic information, symptoms before operation, relevant nerve coaptation, peri-, and postoperative complications, and long-term functional outcomes. Results: Of the 19 patients reviewed, 11 patients underwent TMR of the SPN alone: eight had complete resolution of their symptoms; two indicated partial improvement in pain; and one patient had no improvement. Four patients underwent TMR of the DPN alone: two patients had complete resolution of their pain, and two patients had partial improvement with pain. Four patients underwent TMR of both the SPN/DPN: two patients had complete resolution of their symptoms, and two patients were noted to have significant improvement but had persistent pain from prior foot operations. Average follow-up time was 260 days. Conclusions: TMR is a successful technique in the management of SPN and DPN neuroma pain. Our technique revealed excellent clinical outcomes, no procedure-specific complications, and improved subjective pain reports.

From Case Reports to Molecular Insight: Examining the Outcomes and Underlying Mechanisms of Squamous Cell Carcinoma in Breast Implant Patients-A Systematic Review.

There is extensive coverage in the existing literature on implant-associated lymphomas like anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, but breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) has received limited scholarly attention since its first case in 1992. Thus, this study aims to conduct a qualitative synthesis focused on the underexplored association between breast implants and BIA-SCC. A systematic review was conducted utilizing the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify all currently reported cases of BIA-SCC. Additionally, a literature review was performed to identify potential biochemical mechanisms that could lead to BIA-SCC. Studies were vetted for quality using the NIH quality assessment tool. From an initial pool of 246 papers, 11 met the quality criteria for inclusion, examining a total of 14 patients aged between 40 and 81 years. BIA-SCC was found in a diverse range of implants, including those with smooth and textured surfaces, as well as those filled with saline and silicone. The condition notably manifested a proclivity for aggressive clinical progression, as evidenced by a mortality rate approximating 21.4% within a post-diagnostic interval of six months. Our literature review reveals that chronic inflammation, driven by various external factors such as pathogens and implants, can initiate carcinogenesis through epigenetic modifications and immune system alterations. This includes effects from exosomes and macrophage polarization, showcasing potential pathways for the pathogenesis of BIA-SCC. The study highlights the pressing need for further investigation into BIA-SCC, a subject hitherto inadequately addressed in the academic sphere. This necessitates the urgency for early screening and intervention to improve postoperative outcomes. While the review is confined by its reliance on case reports and series, it serves as a valuable reference for future research endeavors.

Utilization of patient-reported outcome measures in plastic surgery clinical trials: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have evolved to validated questionnaires assessing health-related quality of life. This systematic review evaluates the utilization of PROs in United States plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) clinical trials (CTs). METHODS: A medical librarian conducted a search strategy for PRS CTs from 2012 to 2022. CTs were identified and assessed for PRO utilization. Summary statistics were performed, and Fisher's exact test was used for subgroup analysis. RESULTS: Of the 3609 studies initially identified, 154 were PRS CTs. Approximately half (80 studies) employed PROs, encompassing 13,190 participants, 95% (12,229) of whom were female. Among the CTs, 37 (48%) were in the field of reconstruction, while 25 (32%) were cosmetic. Pain (35%) and patient satisfaction (24%) were the most common primary outcomes. Validated PROs were the main outcome in 61% of these trials, with the visual analog scale (19%) and BREAST-Q (15%) as the top instruments. Funding was primarily private (34%) or not reported (49%). No significant trend in validated PRO usage was observed over the examined decade. CONCLUSIONS: The use of PROs is relevant for healthcare delivery and improvement as they provide insight into the efficacy of treatments from a patient-centered viewpoint. PROs are reported in just over half of PRS CTs, and within those CTs, the use of validated questionnaires is inconsistent. Therefore, emerging CTs should strive to incorporate PRO measures and utilize the existing validated tools to assess novel interventions and ensure that the data reported is objective.

12-Year Trends of Orofacial Clefts in the United States: Highlighting Racial/Ethnic Differences in Prevalence of Cleft Lip and Cleft Palate.

OBJECTIVE: Discrepancies in prevalence among infants with orofacial clefts are public health research priorities. Our objective was to calculate updated estimated prevalence of orofacial clefts in the United States, with sub-analyses by racial/ethnic group. DESIGN: The National Birth Defect Prevention Network database was used to evaluate trends in cases with orofacial cleft in the United States from 2006 to 2018. Cases with cleft lip with and without cleft palate (CL ± P) and cleft palate (CP) alone were sub-stratified by racial/ethnic category. Estimated prevalence was calculated using the total live births reported in each maternal racial/ethnic group. The odds ratio (OR) was calculated to measure the strength of association between racial/ethnic group and risk of orofacial clefts. RESULTS: Estimated prevalence rates show that maternally-reported Native American/Alaskan Native individuals were 43.8% (p < 0.0001) and 36.0% (p < 0.0001) more likely to have CL ± P and CP alone, respectively, compared to maternally-reported non-Hispanic White individuals. Estimated prevalence of CL ± P in maternally-reported non-Hispanic Black individuals (OR = 0.64) and maternally-reported Asians/Pacific Islander individuals were significantly lower than in maternally-reported non-Hispanic White individuals (OR = 0.63, p < 0.0001). Estimated prevalence of CP alone was significantly lower in maternally-reported non-Hispanic Black individuals (OR = 0.64, p < 0.0001), maternally-reported Asians/Pacific Islander individuals (OR = 0.69, p < 0.0001), and maternally-reported Hispanic individuals (OR = 0.81, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Across the total population, there was no significant change in estimated orofacial cleft prevalence. However, there were significant disproportions in estimated orofacial cleft prevalence across racial/ethnic groups, which may guide further discussion among craniofacial health care providers and centers and their patients regarding differences in cleft risk factors.

Evaluating skin colour diversity in the validation of scar assessment tools.

Across scar studies, there is a lack of dark-skinned individuals, who have a predisposition for keloid formation, altered pigmentation and poorer quality of life (QOL). There is a need for patients of colour to be included in scar scale development and validation. In this study, we evaluate the racial diversity of patients included in the validation of scar assessment scales. A systematic review was conducted for articles reporting on the validation of a scar assessment tool. Racial, ethnic and Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) data were extracted. Fifteen scar scale validation studies were included. Nine of the studies did not mention FST, race or ethnicity of the patients. Two of the studies that reported FST or race information only included White patients or included no FST V/VI patients: mapping assessment of scars (MAPS) and University of North Carolina '4P'. Only four studies included non-White patients or dark-skinned patients in the validation of their scar scale: the modified Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), modified Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), acne QOL and SCAR-Q scales. The patients included in the modified VSS validation were 7% and 13% FST V/VI, 14% African in the modified POSAS and 4.5% FST V/VI in the SCAR-Q. We highlight the severe lack of diversity in scar scale validation, with only 4 out of 15 studies including dark-skinned patients. Given the susceptibility of darker-skinned individuals to have poorer scarring outcomes, it is critical to include patients of colour in the very assessment tools that determine their scar prognosis. Inclusion of patients of colour in scar scale development will improve scar assessment and clinical decision-making.