PortFindr: A Novel, More Accurate, and Precise Device for Locating Tissue Expander Ports.

Two-stage breast reconstruction is the most common method of reconstructive modality following mastectomy and requires serial saline infusions into temporary tissue expanders through subcutaneous ports. Historically, these ports were located using a small magnet attached to a string or support structure. Magnetic force decreases exponentially as tissue thickness or fluid accumulation creates more distance between the TE port and skin. We developed a prototype handheld electronic device, the PortFindr, which more accurately and precisely locates the centre of subcutaneous ports. This device may lead to more confident localization of ports, less inadvertent puncture of tissue expanders, and thus less complications during infusions.

La reconstruction mammaire en deux étapes est la principale intervention reconstructive utilisée après une mastectomie. Elle exige plusieurs perfusions de soluté physiologique dans des expanseurs tissulaires temporaires par l'entremise de chambres sous-cutanées. Par le passé, ces chambres étaient localisées à l'aide d'un petit aimant fixé à une cordelette ou une structure de soutien. La force magnétique diminuait exponentiellement à mesure que l'épaisseur du tissu ou l'accumulation de liquide accroissait la distance entre la chambre et la peau. Les chercheurs ont créé un prototype électronique manuel, le PortFindr, qui situe le centre de la chambre sous-cutanée avec plus d'exactitude et de précision. Ce dispositif pourrait permettre de localiser les chambres de manière plus objective, de réduire les perforations accidentelles des expanseurs tissulaires et donc de limiter les complications pendant les perfusions.

#PlasticSurgery: A Comparative Deep Dive Analysis into Social Media and Plastic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: As social media have become pervasive in contemporary society, plastic surgery content has become commonplace. Two of the most engaging and popular platforms are Instagram and Twitter, and much research has been performed with respect to Twitter. Currently, there are no studies comparing and contrasting the two platforms. The aim of this study was to robustly sample plastic surgery posts on Twitter and Instagram to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate platform content differences. METHODS: The hashtag #PlasticSurgery was systematically queried twice per day, for 30 consecutive days, on Twitter and Instagram. Account type, specific media content, possible patient-identifying information, content analysis, and post engagement were assessed. Post volume and engagement between Instagram and Twitter posts were compared. Post characteristics garnering high engagement from each platform were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 3867 Twitter posts and 5098 Instagram posts were included in this analysis. Daily total post volume for the 1-month duration of the study was significantly higher on Instagram compared with Twitter. Overall post engagement was significantly higher on Instagram compared with Twitter. Plastic surgeons and plastic surgery clinics represented the majority of accounts posting on both platforms with #PlasticSurgery. Identifiable patient features were much more prevalent on Instagram. The majority of Instagram posts were promotional in nature, outcome-based, or unrelated to plastic surgery. Alternatively, tweets were predominantly educational in nature. CONCLUSIONS: For physicians to harness the power of social media in plastic surgery, we need to understand how these media are currently being used and how different platforms compare to one another. This study has highlighted the inherent similarities and differences between these two highly popular platforms.

Associations between Orofacial Clefting and Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Orofacial clefting (OFC) is the most common developmental craniofacial malformation, and causal etiologies largely remain unknown. The opioid crisis has led to a large proportion of infants recovering from neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to in-utero narcotics exposure. We sought to characterize the prevalence of OFC in infants with NAS. METHODS: This cohort study analyzed live births at our institution from 2013 to 2017 to identify any association between OFC and NAS. RESULTS: Prevalence of OFC was 6.79 and 1.63 (per 1,000 live births) in the NAS and general population, respectively. Odds ratios for NAS patients having developed OFC, isolated cleft palate, isolated cleft lip, and combined cleft lip and palate compared with the general population were found to be 4.18 (P = 0.001), 5.92 (P = 0.001), 3.79 (P = 0.05), and 2.94 (P = 0.35), respectively. Analyses performed comparing the NAS and general populations to control for potential confounding variables influencing the NAS population yielded no significant differences with exception of in-utero exposure to physician prescribed opioids. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of OFC in infants with NAS was higher than the general live birth population. Isolated cleft palate and isolated cleft lip, specifically, were significantly more prevalent in NAS patients compared with the general population and were associated with in-utero opioid exposure.