The current use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction: device design, features, and technical considerations.

INTRODUCTION: The use of tissue expanders (TE) in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is a widely accepted practice, especially in patients desiring implant-based breast reconstruction. It has become the standard of care to perform a two-staged breast reconstruction using tissue expanders for the past 50 years due to its reliability, safety, cost-effectiveness, and versatility. Due to its popularity, there are numerous types and features of breast tissue expanders and various surgical approaches available for plastic surgeons. AREAS COVERED: In this article, we will review the role of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction, the types and features of breast tissue expanders, and technical considerations. EXPERT OPINION: The use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction offers significant advantages of preserving the breast skin envelope and reestablishing the breast mound. With evolving approaches to breast reconstruction, tissue expander design, and application underwent several refinements and modifications. Due to these advances, studies on its long-term efficacy and safety profile typically fall behind and more studies with higher levels of evidence are needed to better evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of tissue expanders. With increased understanding, reconstructive surgeons can minimize complications and maximize reconstructive, aesthetic outcomes with high patient satisfaction.

The Effect of Vibration on Pain During Intravenous Injection of Propofol: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Pain is a common side effect of intravenous injection of propofol. We conducted a randomized, prospective, single-blinded controlled trial to assess the efficacy of vibration analgesia on pain during propofol infusion in ambulatory surgery. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, 100 patients undergoing elective ambulatory surgery with general anesthesia were randomized into 2 groups. A control group (n = 50) consisted of patients who received infusion of propofol without vibration analgesia. A treatment group (n = 50) consisted of patients who received infusion of propofol with vibration analgesia using the Buzzy device. Pain was assessed using a 4-point pain manifestation scale scored by 2 independent, blinded observers. RESULTS: Participants in the treatment group with vibration analgesia were 0.47 times less likely (95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.94; P = 0.03) to experience any pain than the control group. The median summative pain score in the treatment group was significantly less than that of the control group [1 (interquartile range, 1-2) vs 2 (interquartile range, 2-4); P < 0.01] among participants who experienced any pain. Agreement between the 2 blinded observers regarding pain scores was excellent with κw = 0.82 (P < 0.001). Age, sex, body mass index, needle location or size, and medication doses did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Vibration analgesia is an effective, low-risk modality that reduces the pain of intravenous propofol injection in general anesthesia.

Feasibility of a lifestyle intervention for overweight/obese endometrial and breast cancer survivors using an interactive mobile application.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess a one-month lifestyle intervention delivered via a web- and mobile-based weight-loss application (app) (LoseIt!) using a healthcare-provider interface. METHODS: Early-stage overweight/obese (body mass index [BMI]≥25kg/m(2)) cancer survivors (CS) diagnosed in the past three years, and without recurrent disease were enrolled and received exercise and nutrition counseling using the LoseIt! app. Entry and exit quality of life (FACT-G) and Weight Efficacy Lifestyle Questionnaire (WEL) measuring self-efficacy were measured along with anthropometrics, daily food intake, and physical activity (PA) using the app. RESULTS: Mean participant age was 58.4±10.3years (n=50). Significant reductions (p<0.0006) in anthropometrics were noted between pre- and post-intervention weight (105.0±21.8kg versus 98.6±22.5kg); BMI (34.9±8.7kg/m(2) versus 33.9±8.4kg/m(2)); and waist circumference (108.1±14.9cm versus 103.7±15.1cm). A significant improvement in pre- and post-intervention total WEL score was noted (99.38±41.8 versus 120.19±47.1, p=0.043). No significant differences were noted in FACT-G, macronutrient consumption, and PA patterns. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that a lifestyle intervention delivered via a web- and mobile-based weight-loss app is a feasible option by which to elicit short-term reductions in weight. Though these results parallel the recent survivors of uterine cancer empowered by exercise and healthy diet (SUCCEED) trial, it is notable that they were achieved without encumbering significant cost and barrier-access issues (i.e. time, transportation, weather, parking, etc.).