Assessment of deep inferior epigastric perforator flap perfusion with near-infrared fluorescence: A pilot study and description of a standardized working protocol.

Fat necrosis (FN) is a common complication after autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) using a free flap, which can influence reconstruction outcome and patient satisfaction. Intraoperative near-infrared fluorescence imaging using indocyanine green (ICG) permits the visualization of flap perfusion. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of near-infrared fluorescence on FN incidence in patients undergoing an ABR with a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP) and to propose a standard working protocol for this technique. In this prospective study, patients undergoing one-sided ABR with a DIEP were included. The standard DIEP procedure was complemented with near-infrared fluorescence imaging using the fluorescent tracer ICG to evaluate flap perfusion. This cohort was compared to a retrospective cohort of DIEP procedures without near-infrared fluorescence imaging. Patients and surgery characteristics, as well as postoperative complications, were registered and compared. In both cohorts, 24 patients were included. No significant differences were present between patients and surgery characteristics, including no difference in duration of surgery. In the prospective and retrospective group, the incidence of FN was 4.2% and 33%, respectively (p-value = 0.023). Moreover, microsurgeons were positive about using near-infrared fluorescence as it either provided additional information about perfusion or confirmed the clinical assessment. Our pilot study showed a significant decrease of FN in patients undergoing an ABR with a DIEP when near-infrared fluorescence imaging was used to assess flap perfusion. This study provides a standardized working protocol for near-infrared fluorescence imaging. In the future, large multicenter studies should focus on the quantification of near-infrared fluorescence imaging.

Implant Loss and Associated Risk Factors following Implant-based Breast Reconstructions.

Implant loss is the most severe complication of implant-based breast reconstructions. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of implant loss and other complications, identify associated risk factors, and create a risk model for implant loss. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent a mastectomy, followed by either a two-stage or a direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Patient variables, operative characteristics, and postoperative complications were obtained from the patient records. A multivariate mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to create a risk model for implant loss. RESULTS: A total of 297 implant-based breast reconstructions were evaluated. Overall, the incidence of implant loss was 11.8%. Six risk factors were significantly associated with implant loss: obesity, a bra cup size larger than C, active smoking status, a nipple-preserving procedure, a direct-to-implant reconstruction, and a lower surgeon's volume. A risk model for implant loss was created, showing a predicted risk of 8.4%-13% in the presence of one risk factor, 21.9%-32.5% in the presence of two, 47.5%-59.3% in the presence of three, and over 78.2% in the presence of four risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of implant loss in this study was 11.8%. Six associated significant risk factors were identified. Our risk model for implant loss revealed that the predicted risk increased over 78.2% when four risk factors were present. This risk model can be used to better inform patients and decrease the risk of implant loss by optimizing surgery using personalized therapy.

Evaluating the Psychopathological Profile of Women Undergoing Reduction Mammaplasty With the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised.

BACKGROUND: Patients who desire reduction mammaplasty (RM) also may seek relief from social and emotional challenges that accompany their physical condition, including low self-confidence and impaired body image. Reduction mammaplasty is known to improve patients' physical and psychological well-being. It may be speculated that patients who undergo RM are motivated by psychological problems and have psychopathologies. Health care insurers reluctant to cover the expense of this surgery may cite mental health as a reason to deny coverage. OBJECTIVES: The authors assessed the psychopathological profile of patients who presented for RM, utilizing a validated instrument, and compared scores with standard norm values. METHODS: Preoperatively, 67 women were assessed with the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R), a validated instrument for evaluating a broad range of psychopathological problems and symptoms. The SCL-90-R provides a general psychoneurosis score, as well as scores for 8 symptom subscales. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 36 ± 11.2 years. The mean (SD) total score on the SCL-90-R was 130 (38.7), which was not significantly higher than the norm score of 123. Only the subscores for somatization and sleep disturbance were significantly higher than the norm scores for these subscales. Compared with the norm score for women who presented with chronic pain, the total score for our study population was significantly lower. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo RM have normal scores for psychoneurosis according to the SCL-90-R. Health care insurance coverage for RM should not be denied on the basis that the motivation for surgery relates to psychopathology. Additionally, psychological testing is not recommended for most patients who desire breast reduction surgery; rather, clinical judgment based on common sense should be applied. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Draining after breast reduction: a randomised controlled inter-patient study.

One hundred and seven bilateral breast reductions were prospectively randomised during surgery to receive or not receive wound drains. Fifty-five patients were randomised to have a drain and 52 to not have a drain. There was no statistical difference in the number of complications between the drained and undrained group (P=0.092; student's t-test for independent observations). Twenty-two of the 55 patients in the drained group had a complication, 12 of the 52 patients in the undrained group had a complication. The hospital stay was significantly shorter (P<0.001) in the undrained group. The main discomfort score due to the presence of the drains was 5.62, which can be qualified as high. This study demonstrates that breast reduction without postoperative draining does not increase the risk of complications, increases the patient's comfort and significantly reduces hospital stay.

Quality control of colorectal surgery with an extensive complication registration system.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Since 1996, a standard registration is used to obtain a clear understanding of the complications that occur after colorectal surgery. In our registration system the cause of a complication and the detrimental effect to the patient's health are coded. METHODS: The treatment of colorectal diseases was evaluated to analyze the quality of medical care. RESULTS: From 1996 to 2000, a total of 169 complications were documented in 108 of the 353 patients operated on. Leakage of the anastomosis occurred in 22 cases (6%) and wound infection occurred in 11 cases (3%). Most of the complications required no or little medical attention (n = 101, 59%). 51% of the complications could be attributed to the physical condition of the patient. Surgical complications were the cause in 31% of the cases and management problems in 16% of the cases. CONCLUSION: A registration system provides good insight into the frequency and severity of the complications after colorectal surgery. Extensive registration is mandatory to provide reliable information, comparing the results year by year. This provides the basis for continuous improvement of medical protocols on the surgical ward.

Reliable and feasible evaluation of linear scars by the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale.

BACKGROUND: Although scar evaluation tools are necessary for an evidence-based approach to scar management, there is as yet no generally accepted tool. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale was developed recently and found to be a useful subjective evaluation tool for burn scars. The authors tested the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale on linear scars, the largest category of surgical scars. METHODS: One hundred linear surgical scars were assessed by three independent observers using the observer scale to evaluate vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, relief, pliability, and surface area. The patients evaluated their scars simultaneously and 2 weeks later using the patient scale for the following parameters: pain, itching, color, stiffness, thickness, and relief. RESULTS: The internal consistency of the observer and patient scales was good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.86 and 0.90, respectively). The reliability of the observer scale was good for the total score (r = 0.96, p < 0.001) and separate items (r > 0.86, p < 0.001) for three observers. Even a single observer evaluated scars reliably with respect to the total score (r = 0.88, p < 0.001) and the items vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, and surface area (r > 0.70, p < 0.001). The patient's intraobserver reliability was good for the total score (r = 0.94, p < 0.001) and separate items (r > 0.89, p < 0.001). The coefficient of variation of the total score was 10.4 percent for the observer scale and 15.8 percent for the patient scale, indicating good agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale is an appropriate subjective tool for the evaluation of linear scars.