Outcomes of Immediate versus Delayed Autologous Reconstruction in the Setting of Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy: A Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Post-mastectomy autologous breast reconstruction can be immediate (IBR) or delayed (DBR). The safety of performing IBR and the impact of radiation on the newly reconstructed breast is not yet validated. METHODS: A Pubmed, EMBASE, and Google scholar search was conducted from inception to September 17th 2023. We included comparative studies that assessed complications or aesthetic outcomes of IBR versus DBR in the setting of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). RESULTS: The search identified 2693 articles. Thirteen were eligible for inclusion. A total of 565 patients underwent IBR followed by radiotherapy while 699 had DBR. Mean follow-up time and age for both groups were comparable (p > 0.1). None of revision surgery, infection, total flap failure, seroma, hematoma, dehiscence, or delayed wound healing was significantly different across groups (p > 0.1). IBR was found to have a higher risk of flap fibrosis (OR 28.18 [5.15 - 154.12]; p = 0.0001, I 2 of 44%) and skin flap necrosis (OR 6.12 [2.71 - 13.82]; p < 0.0001, I 2 of 27%) but a lower risk of partial flap failure (OR 0.18 [0.06 - 0.58]; p 0.004, I 2 of 0%) when compared to DBR. Results of fat necrosis should be interpreted with caution. Patient-reported as well as objective aesthetic outcomes were mostly comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: IBR in the setting of PMRT is increasingly being performed and poses a specific set of challenges that surgeons usually consider. The choice between IBR or DBR in the setting of PMRT should be an individualized decision based on patient risk factors and desires. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Recent Training Trends in Independent Plastic Surgery Graduates: American Board of Surgery Certification and Academic Priorities.

BACKGROUND: Among independent plastic surgery graduates, most have general surgery training, but the utility of American Board of Surgery (ABS) certification in plastic surgery practice is unclear. We elucidated attitudes and trends of ABS certification in American Board of Plastic Surgery diplomates. METHODS: American Board of Plastic Surgery diplomates from 2018 to 2020 were reviewed to identify independent plastic surgery graduates. These graduates were anonymously surveyed regarding demographics, employment, fellowships, practices, and attitudes toward ABS certification. RESULTS: Of 568 American Board of Plastic Surgery diplomates, 223 independent graduates (39%) were identified. Sixty-eight percent of these graduates were ABS certified, 80% of whom achieved certification during the beginning of plastic and reconstructive surgery training; 41% were fellowship trained. About half are in private practice, 25% are part of a hospital group, and 17% work in universities. Of 223 independent graduates, 54 (24.4%) completed the survey; 85.2% reported ABS certification, and 21.7% perform general surgery procedures. Most stated that general surgery training was valuable to their career, regardless of certification. Most agreed that ABS certification benefited their career; 63% plan to recertify. Of those surveyed, 59.3% had completed a plastic surgery fellowship. Non-fellowship-trained surgeons felt more strongly that ABS certification was beneficial (P = 0.014) and valued by patients (P = 0.026) compared with fellowship-trained surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: American Board of Surgery certification is a priority to independent plastic surgery trainees, despite potential disruption to training, personal costs, and unclear utility to their practice. Although few perform general surgery procedures, most plan to recertify. Future studies should investigate recertification among surgeons later in their careers and the impacts of dual board certification on plastic surgery practice.

The Revolving Door of Residency: Predictors of Residency Attrition for Urology Matriculants Between 2001 and 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To add to the literature which has reported higher attrition rates amongst General Surgery residents who identify as female or underrepresented in medicine (URM), we aimed to determine how these factors contribute to attrition within Urology. We hypothesized that women and URM Urology residents will similarly have higher attrition rates. METHODS: The Association of American Medical Colleges surveyed residents to obtain matriculation and attrition status from 2001 to 2016. Data included demographics, medical school type, and specialty. A multivariable logistic regression model was performed to identify predictors of attrition amongst Urology residents. RESULTS: In our sample of 4321 Urology residents, 22.5% were female, 9.9% were URM, 25.8% were older than 30 years, 2.5% were Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine graduates and 4.7% were International Medical Graduates. On multivariable analysis, being female (Odds ratio [OR] = 2.3, P < .001) was associated with increased residency attrition when compared to male residents. Additionally, residents who matriculated between 30 and 39 years old (OR = 1.9, P < .001) or ≥40 years old (OR = 10.7, P < .001) had an increased risk of residency attrition when compared to residents who matriculated between 26 and 29 years old. Attrition rates for URM trainees have recently increased. CONCLUSION: Women, older, and URM Urology residents experience higher rates of attrition compared to their peers. It is essential to identify trainees with a higher likelihood of attrition to determine system-level changes to combat departures from training programs. Our study highlights the need to foster more inclusive training environments and change institutional cultures to diversify the surgical workforce.

13-Year Analysis of Gender Disparity in Peer-reviewed Burn Literature.

Women are less likely to be senior authors, invited to write in scientific journals, and to be cited in high impact journals. The aim of this study was to investigate trends in authorship and gender differences in peer-reviewed burn literature over 13 years. We performed a retrospective analysis of original research articles published from January 2009 to September 2021 in three burn journals. A gender determination application was used to categorize the gender of the first and senior author. Of the 3908 articles analyzed, 42.5% had a woman first author and 27.6% had a woman senior author. We identified 2029 unique senior authors, 29.0% of whom were women. Woman senior authorship was associated with increased odds of woman first authorship [OR = 2.31 (95% CI: 2.00, 2.67); P < .001]. The percentage of papers with a woman senior author increased from 17.8% in 2009 to 35.7% in 2021. If this 1.0% (95% CI: 0.50-1.51%) linear trend increase per year in woman senior authorship continues, we will expect to see equal proportions of woman and man senior authors in the included journals starting in 2037. The field of burn care is far from reaching gender parity with respect to authorship of peer-reviewed publications. Supporting and encouraging gender-concordant and discordant first:last authorship dyads in mentorship as well as redistributing obligations that may detract from authorship opportunities are potential ways to improve parity in authorship and academia.

Racial and socioeconomic status differences in stress, posttraumatic growth, and mental health in an older adult cohort during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted the most vulnerable and widened the health disparity gap in both physical and mental well-being. Consequentially, it is vital to understand how to best support elderly individuals, particularly Black Americans and people of low socioeconomic status, in navigating stressful situations during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. The aim of this study was to investigate perceived levels of stress, posttraumatic growth, coping strategies, socioeconomic status, and mental health between Black and non-Hispanic, White older adults, the majority over the age of 70. Additionally, we investigated which variables, if any, were associated with posttraumatic growth in these populations. Methods: One hundred seventy-six community dwelling older adults (mean age = 76.30 ±8.94), part of two observational studies (The Harvard Aging Brain Study and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Study) in Massachusetts, US, were included in this cross-sectional study. The survey, conducted from March 23, 2021 to May 13, 2021, measured perceived stress, behavioral coping strategies, posttraumatic growth, and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated associations with post-traumatic growth in a multiple linear regression model and examined their differences by race with t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and Fisher's exact tests. A second multiple linear regression model was used to examine which coping strategies were associated with posttraumatic growth. Findings: Our results indicated no significant difference between the groups in terms of mental health or stress. However, Black participants showed significantly greater posttraumatic growth compared to non-Hispanic, White participants. Additionally, the coping strategies of religion and positive reframing were found to be significantly associated with posttraumatic growth. Furthermore, even with the effects of stress and coping strategies controlled for, race remained significantly associated with posttraumatic growth. Interpretation: The COVID-19 pandemic has differentially impacted Black and non-Hispanic White older adults. These results may help encourage further analysis on geriatric psychiatry as well as understanding how cultural values and adaptations impact posttraumatic growth and mental health in diverse populations. Funding: The Harvard Aging Brain Study (HABS) has been funded by NIH-NIA P01 AG036694 (PI: Reisa Sperling). The IADL study is funded by the National Institute on Aging (R01 AG053184, PI: Gad A. Marshall).