Superiority of a Silk Surgical Site Wound Closure Device Over Synthetic Dressings.

BACKGROUND: Silk fibroin is an emerging biomaterial with enhanced properties of cellular regeneration, growth and proliferation. The use of a silk fibroin wound dressing has the potential to decrease the incidence of wound healing complications and to improve patient outcomes compared to synthetic dressing alternatives. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical trial was conducted on 50 patients who were dressed with a silk fibroin dressing on one side of their body and on the contralateral side with 3M Steri-Strips® after undergoing abdominoplasty, reduction mammaplasty, or brachioplasty procedures. Data was collected over 5 postoperative visits using photographs and an investigator administered questionnaire to monitor erythema, skin irritation, skin discomfort, the need for pharmaceutical intervention, wound dehiscence and mechanical skin injury. A comprehensive 75 patient statistical analysis was conducted combining the results with a previously published study comparing Dermabond® Prineo® to the silk dressing. RESULTS: 20.8% (10/48) of patients were assessed by surgeons as having skin erythema (7-10) on the Steri-Strip® control side and 0% (0/48) on the silk dressing side (p=0.002). The frequency of breast triple point separation in 43 cases was 30.2% (13/43) on the Steri-Strip® side and 9.3% (4/43) on the silk side (p=0.012). 75% (36/48) of patients had partial or total detachment of Steri-Strips® while 0% (0/48) had total detachment of the silk dressing and 18.8% (9/48) had partial detachment of the silk dressing within the first two weeks (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: A silk fibroin wound dressing significantly reduces the incidence of wound healing complications throughout the postoperative period.Clinical Relevance Statement: The adoption of a silk fibroin wound dressing into clinical practice has the potential to improve patient outcomes, decrease medical adhesive related skin injuries and reduce the rate of wound healing complications.

Report on Mortality from Gluteal Fat Grafting: Recommendations from the ASERF Task Force.

Background: Gluteal fat grafting is among the fastest growing aesthetic procedures in the United States and around the world. Given numerous anecdotal and published reports of fatal and nonfatal pulmonary fat embolism resulting from this procedure, the Aesthetic Surgery Education and Research Foundation (ASERF) formed a Task Force to study this complication. Objectives: To determine the incidence of fatal and nonfatal pulmonary fat embolism associated with gluteal fat grafting and provide recommendations to decrease the risks of the procedure. Methods: An anonymous web-based survey was sent to 4843 plastic surgeons worldwide. Additional data on morbidity and mortality was collected through confidential interviews with plastic surgeons and medical examiners, public records requests for autopsy reports in the United States, and through the American Association for the Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgical Facilities (AAAASF). Results: Six hundred and ninety-two (692) surgeons responding to the survey reported 198,857 cases of gluteal fat grafting. Over their careers, surgeons reported 32 fatalities from pulmonary fat emboli as well as 103 nonfatal pulmonary fat emboli. Three percent (3%) of respondents experienced a patient fatality and 7% of respondents reported at least one pulmonary fat embolism in a patient over their careers. Surgeons reporting the practice of injecting into the deep muscle experienced a significantly increased incidence rate of fatal and nonfatal pulmonary fat emboli. Twenty-five fatalities were confirmed in the United States over the last 5 years through of autopsy reports and interviews with surgeons and medical examiners. Four deaths were reported from 2014 to 2015 from pulmonary fat emboli in AAAASF facilities. Conclusions: Despite the growing popularity of gluteal fat grafting, significantly higher mortality rates appear to be associated with gluteal fat grafting than with any other aesthetic surgical procedure. Based on this survey, fat injections into the deep muscle, using cannulae smaller than 4 mm, and pointing the injection cannula downwards should be avoided. More research is necessary to increase the safety of this procedure.

Buttock augmentation with silicone implants: a multicenter survey review of 2226 patients.

BACKGROUND: Enhancement of buttock volume with gluteal silicone implants has been performed by surgeons for over 30 years, but no studies have examined complication rates or outcomes of more than single-surgeon experiences. Numerous technical differences in how gluteal augmentation surgery with implants is performed also exist, and to date, surgeon preferences for implant plane, incisional access, implant type, and drain use have not been quantified. METHODS: A 10-question survey was sent to 83 targeted members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons requesting information about number of cases performed, duration of surgeon experience, implant placement plane and incisional access, implant type, length of typical surgery, use of drains and antibiotic irrigation solution, surgeon satisfaction and surgeon assessment of patient satisfaction, and number of complications experienced. RESULTS: Nineteen respondents (25 percent response rate) provided data on 2226 patients. Thirteen respondents (68.4 percent) favored the intramuscular plane of dissection over the subfascial plane. Preference for incisional access was nearly equally divided between a single incision in the gluteal cleft (10 respondents) and two incisions separated within the cleft (nine respondents). The total number of complications reported was 848 (38.1 percent). CONCLUSIONS: Gluteal augmentation with silicone implants has gained popularity in the last decade. Despite this, no previous studies have examined multisurgeon experiences with this procedure to determine complication rates or surgeon technical preferences. The authors present data from a survey sent to experienced gluteal augmentation surgeons. Advances in technique and implant options are needed to improve complication rates experienced with this procedure.

Abdominoplasty revision using tissue expansion.

UNLABELLED: Postoperative revision after abdominoplasty may be necessary at times to improve contour, remove asymmetries, revise the umbilicus, or improve the scar. This report describes the case of an abdominoplasty performed outside the United States that resulted in an inappropriately high and unattractive scar with an elevated pubic hairline. The patient presented to our clinic 2 years after her initial surgery, and a scar-lowering procedure was performed with the assistance of tissue expansion. The reconstructive effort was staged over a period of 4 months, with an initial procedure to repair several hernias, bury the umbilicus, and place a tissue expander. Over several months, 3.5 L of expansion was performed. During a subsequent surgery, the tissue expander was removed, and the scar was successfully lowered and improved. The healing was uneventful, and the patient was satisfied with the outcome. The final result is exhibited in 1-month follow-up photographs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Acellular dermal matrix in cosmetic breast procedures and capsular contracture.

Prevention and treatment of capsular contracture after breast augmentation is a controversial and oftentimes vexing problem. While there are traditional methods of addressing this condition, acellular dermal matrix materials offer a new and promising modality that is gaining momentum in the field of plastic surgery. In this article, the author examines the etiology and pathophysiology of capsular contracture and review the existing literature on acellular dermal matrix in breast surgery related to capsular contracture.

A novel technique for repositioning lower eyelid fat via the transoral approach in association with midface lift.

BACKGROUND: Orbital fat repositioning in association with subperiosteal midface elevation has been variably described via both the transconjunctival and skin muscle flap approaches. Poor visualization, middle and posterior lamellar cicatricial fibrosis, technical difficulty, and incomplete release are disadvantages commonly ascribed to the transconjunctival approach. Lower eyelid malposition and retraction also are commonly seen in association with skin muscle flap approaches. A simple technique using the intraoral approach to release the orbital septum and postseptal fat is described in this report. This procedure avoids complications associated with the violation of key lower eyelid anatomic structures and markedly improves visualization through an incision allowing a much larger access. METHODS: A retrospective review of six patients who underwent endoscopically assisted midface elevation in combination with lower eyelid fat repositioning via a transoral approach since 2009 and were followed up for at least 1 year is presented. A pre- and postoperative assessment of tear trough depth, lower eyelid fat herniation, and midface descent is made. Four of the six patients presented also underwent concurrent additional facial rejuvenation procedures including endoscopically assisted brow-lift, genioplasty, structural fat grafting to the nasolabial folds, and lower eyelid "pinch" blepharoplasty. Standard upper buccal sulcus access incisions were used for subperiosteal midface elevation and exposure of the lower orbital septum. Fat redraped over the orbital rim was not secured with fixation sutures as is commonly performed using lower eyelid approaches. Human cadaveric dissection with endoscopic visualization also was performed to demonstrate the reported technique. RESULTS: During this study, one complication developed for a single patient who experienced a temporary dense right zygomatic and frontal branch nerve palsy lasting 8 weeks. No evidence of lower eyelid malposition, ectropion, entropion, incomplete release, or asymmetry was otherwise encountered. Improvement in tear trough appearance, lower eyelid herniation, and midface descent was noted in all six patients. CONCLUSION: A novel approach for lower eyelid fat transposition in combination with midface lift using the intraoral approach is presented. Excellent visualization, decreased operative times, technical ease, and improved outcomes all are potential advantages of this technique over standard approaches in which access to lower eyelid fat is achieved through the conjunctiva or a skin muscle flap.

Pocket conversion made easy: a simple technique using alloderm to convert subglandular breast implants to the dual-plane position.

BACKGROUND: The advantages of dual-plane, partially submuscular breast implants are well documented. Standard conversion techniques to dual-plane positioning use marionette sutures and internal capsulorrhaphy sutures from the lower edge of the pectoralis major muscle to the anterior capsule or breast fascia within the subglandular plane. These techniques are limited by high rates of postoperative implant malposition and technical limitations that make combined mastopexy procedures difficult to perform. OBJECTIVE: We describe a simple technique familiar to most plastic surgeons accustomed to placing tissue expanders for use in breast reconstruction using Alloderm (LifeCell Corp., Branchburg, NJ) as a sling beneath the pectoralis major muscle to the chest wall. METHODS: We studied 25 women who underwent breast augmentation revision from the subglandular to the dual-plane position by performing a 9-year retrospective review from 1999 to 2007 of 2 surgeons' experience. We identified 10 women for whom Alloderm, sutured from the lower edge of the pectoralis major muscle to the chest wall, was used to create a composite pectoralis-Alloderm pocket for partial submuscular transfer of implants and 15 case controls who underwent pocket conversion using standard capsulorrhaphy and marionette suture techniques. RESULTS: The principal outcome variable of at least 1 complication was 73.3% without Alloderm, resulting in a 40% need for revision surgery, versus 0% with Alloderm (Fisher exact test; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The standard techniques available for conversion of subglandular breast implants to the dual-plane position using capsulorrhaphy and marionette sutures are limited by a high complication rate for the reliable positioning into a stable dual-plane pocket during implant exchange. A commonly used technique in reconstructive breast surgery using Alloderm is shown to reliably convert subglandular implants to the dual-plane position.

Nipple-areola complex sensitivity after primary breast augmentation: a comparison of periareolar and inframammary incision approaches.

BACKGROUND: The body of literature documenting normative breast sensation and postoperative changes in sensation after reduction mammaplasty has grown considerably over the last several years. Despite this, only two studies have ever been published on the subject of postaugmentation mammaplasty sensory outcomes. The purpose of this study was to precisely measure sensory thresholds at the nipple-areola complex in women who have undergone augmentation mammaplasty by either the inframammary or periareolar approach. METHODS: Twenty women underwent primary augmentation mammaplasty by either the periareolar or inframammary approach at an average follow-up of 1.12 years. Sensory testing was performed using the Pressure-Specified Sensory Device by comparing moving and static sensory thresholds at the upper and lower areola and nipple. Nine women served as size-matched, nonoperated controls in the study. RESULTS: Primary augmentation mammaplasty was found to have a statistically significant negative effect on sensory outcomes when nonoperated controls were compared with women who had undergone augmentation mammaplasty via either the periareolar or inframammary approach. No differences in sensory outcomes were found between the two approaches used. Implant volume was found to be highly predictive of sensory outcomes, with an inverse relationship between implant size and the degree of sensitivity within the nipple-areola complex. CONCLUSIONS: Plastic surgeons should feel comfortable counseling patients that augmentation mammaplasty by either the inframammary or periareolar approach results in no discernible differences in sensory outcomes. Furthermore, women who choose very large implants relative to their breast skin envelopes should be warned about potential adverse sensory sequelae within the nipple-areola complex.