Flap Closure of Spinal Defects in High-Risk Patients: A 10-Year Institutional Experience.

BACKGROUND: Complication rates after spinal surgery are high, in part because of surgical advancements that have made procedures available to a broader range of medically complicated patients. The high rates of infection, hematoma, and dehiscence resulting in open wounds after spinal surgery often warrant plastic surgery involvement. In this study, we aim to examine the effects of preoperative and operative risk factors on complication rates, reoperation rates, and hospital length of stay after flap reconstruction of spinal defects. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 373 patients who required flap reconstruction for spinal wound closure at our institution between 2003 and 2013. Data regarding demographics, comorbidities, operative variables, and postreconstructive course were collected. RESULTS: Of the 373 patients, 97.3% had at least 1 comorbid condition associated with poor wound healing, 91.2% had a significant wound condition at the time of reconstruction, and 81.8% had a history of 2 or more spinal surgeries. After reconstruction, average hospital stay was 14 days, with 35% of patients developing complications and 30% requiring reoperation. Risk factors including elevated body mass index, diabetes, tobacco use, steroid use, low prealbumin level, therapeutic anticoagulation, infection, history of spine surgery, multilevel spinal reconstruction, and spinal hardware were associated with complications, reoperations, and prolonged length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Local muscle flap coverage is an effective strategy for the reconstruction of spinal defects in medically complex patients. To reduce the inherently high risks associated with paraspinous reconstruction in this challenging population, special consideration should be given to preoperative and operative variables associated with poor outcomes. Early coordination between spine and plastic surgeons should be considered in patients at high-risk of wound complications.

Classifying severity of abdominal contour deformities after weight loss to aid in patient counseling: a review of 1006 cases.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal contour deformities after massive weight loss are highly variable, ranging from a mild upper protuberance to multiple rolls. Correction of these deformities is challenging and may require advanced surgical techniques. Evaluating the incidence of patients presenting with various abdominal deformities and the factors influencing these deformities could aid patients undergoing weight loss. METHODS: All massive weight loss patients presenting for abdominal contouring from 2002 to 2012 were reviewed, and abdomens were graded using a modified Pittsburgh Rating Scale. Data collected for each patient included body mass indices, history of bariatric surgery, and type of abdominal contouring surgery. RESULTS: One thousand six patients were evaluated, with a mean age of 44.2 ± 10.5 years. The mean maximum body mass index was 51.7 ± 9.6 kg/m2, mean current body mass index was 30.0 ± 6.4 kg/m2, and mean change in body mass index was 21.7 ± 7.0 kg/m2. Sixty-four percent had a high-grade deformity. Patients with a larger change in body mass index had higher deformity grades (p < 0.001). Patients with higher deformity grades were more likely to undergo a fleur-de-lis abdominoplasty (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients presenting for body contouring after massive weight loss have high-grade abdominal deformities with multiple rolls. Change in body mass index is positively correlated with deformity grade and more aggressive contouring procedures. Patients interested in massive weight loss should be counseled that, depending on desire for eventual outcomes, more complex procedures may be required to correct the resultant abdominal deformity.

Neurofibromas with imaging characteristics resembling vascular anomalies.

OBJECTIVE: Although neurofibromas are rare, their initial clinical and imaging presentation can mimic those of vascular anomalies, particularly if the characteristic clinical features of neurofibromatosis are not present. The diagnostic challenges encountered in five cases of histologically proven neurofibromas, initially diagnosed as vascular anomalies, are reviewed and discussed. CONCLUSION: The clinical and imaging differences between neurofibromas and vascular anomalies are detailed with the histopathologic features to better understand why some neurofibromas are diagnosed as vascular anomalies.