A comparative study between deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction and DIEP flap breast reconstruction coupled with vascularized lymph node transfer: Improving the quality of life of patients with breast cancer related lymphedema without affecting donor site outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Despite simultaneous microvascular breast reconstruction (MBR) and vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) gaining wide popularity as a potential treatment for breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL), there is a lack of evidence supporting the procedure. There are few reports in the literature, and no study has compared simple deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) to simultaneous DIEP flap and VLNT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of our series of DIEP flaps was conducted. Patients presenting with BCRL who had delayed MBR and simultaneous VLNT were selected. Thirty-two patients were included and compared with a control group of delayed MBR with DIEP flap alone. Clinical evaluation, circumference reduction rate, and LYMQOL questionnaire were used to compare preoperative and postoperative findings in the study group. A digital version of BREAST Q questionnaire was administered to all patients. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled in the study group, with a mean follow-up of 42.5 ± 25.7 months and mean age of 54.1 ± 7.8 years. The mean circumference reduction rate was 46.1 ± 52.3, 39 ± 42.3, 47.5 ± 53.5, 39.2 ± 52.4, 33.6 ± 50.1 at the deltoid insertion, above the elbow, below the elbow, at the mid-forearm and wrist respectively. Postoperative LYMQOL scores significantly improved (function 1.21, appearance 1.15, symptoms 1.34, mood 1.33, overall QOLscore 8.6) from preoperative baseline (p < .001). There was no significant difference in term of outcomes and complications rate of the donor site between the study and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous DIEPandVLNT improves the HRQOL of patients with lymphedema. Coupling VLNT with abdominal flap does not increase the morbidity of donor site.

Safe and sustainable increases in day case emergency surgery.

UNLABELLED: Selected patients referred to emergency general surgery departments are suitable for day case emergency surgery with no overnight hospital stay. There are no well-described sustainable pathways for these expedited operations and in many hospitals patients undergo unnecessary admissions and experience long waiting times. METHODS: The authors proposed a new, sustainable, day case emergency surgery pathway which was implemented to streamline the assessment, treatment and discharge of acute surgical referrals. It requires rapid assessment of the patient by a senior clinician, and ready availability of diagnostic services and operating facilities. To assess this pathway, the authors conducted a prospective audit of general surgical referrals to a district general hospital in the UK. RESULTS: During the inclusion period 746 emergency referrals were assessed, 281 (37%) of these underwent an operation. Over a 5-month investigation period, the audit found that approximately 27% of all emergency general surgery patients requiring an operation could be managed with day case emergency surgery. This figure was maintained throughout the duration of the study. Operations included incision and drainage of abscesses, incarcerated hernia repairs and appendicectomies. The average length of stay of all surgical admissions decreased from 5 days to less than 3 days and the median time to senior review was 30 minutes. DISCUSSION: The authors have developed a pathway involving permanent members of the surgical assessment team that is sustainable over a 5-month period. The pathway has allowed rapid assessment of patients and reduced unnecessary inpatient stay in a sustainable and reproducible manner.

Guidelines in Emergency Medicine Network (GEMNet): guideline for the use of thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory trauma patients requiring temporary limb immobilisation.

The Guidelines in Emergency Medicine Network (GEMNet) has been created to promote best medical practice in a range of conditions presenting to emergency departments (EDs) in the UK. This guideline presents a summary of the best available evidence to guide the use of thromboprophylaxis in adult ambulatory outpatients who present to the ED following acute limb trauma and require temporary immobilisation. The document has been developed following discussion among emergency physicians and collegiate fellows to decide which topics would benefit from the development of clinical guidelines. The document is intended as a guideline for use in the ED by emergency physicians and is based on the review of the best existing evidence for treatments used in this setting. The document is summarised as a Clinical Decision Support Guideline that has been presented as an easy to follow algorithm. The intention is for each guideline to be updated and reviewed as further evidence becomes available. The formal revision date has been set at 5 years from publication, though the guideline is subject to continuous informal review.

Influence of chin prominence on esthetic lip profile preferences.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of chin prominence on preferred lip position in profile. METHODS: Five "male" and 5 "female" silhouette profiles differing only in the degree of mandibular retrognathism or prognathism (-25 degrees, -18 degrees, -11 degrees, -4 degrees , and +3 degrees facial contour angles) were created. Using a computer animation program, the evaluators moved the upper and lower lips independently into the positions they deemed to be the most esthetic for each profile. The evaluators included white male and female adolescent orthodontic patients, parents of patients, and orthodontists. RESULTS: In general, no differences in preferred lip position were found between the -11 degrees and -4 degrees profiles or between the -18 degrees and +3 degrees profiles, but preferences for each of the 3 profile groupings (-11 degrees and -4 degrees, -18 degrees and +3 degrees, and -25 degrees) were different. Fuller lip positions were preferred for the more extreme retrognathic and prognathic profiles, whereas more retrusive lip positions were preferred for the more average profiles. No differences were found among the 3 evaluator groups or between male and female evaluators. Scattered differences were found among lip preferences for male and female profiles.