Brett Michelotti

Complications in tissue expander breast reconstruction: a comparison of AlloDerm, DermaMatrix, and FlexHD acellular inferior pole dermal slings.

AbstractAcellular dermal matrix (ADM) is frequently used in tissue expander breast reconstruction (TEBR) for coverage of the inferior pole. Several published studies have suggested increased rates of complications with the use of ADM. It is unknown, however, if the type of ADM used for TEBR impacts complication rates. The aim of this study is to compare 3 different types of ADM for TEBR in regard to clinically significant complications, specifically infection. We performed a retrospective analysis of primary breast cancer-related TEBR with or without ADM. Exclusion criteria consisted of prior major breast surgery, inadequate data, or loss to follow-up. Reconstructions were grouped by dermal sling type, AlloDerm, DermaMatrix (DM), FlexHD (FHD), or no ADM. Complications included cellulitis, abscess, seroma, expander leak or puncture, skin necrosis, wound dehiscence, or hematoma. Those requiring admission to hospital or reoperation were considered significant. Of 284 breasts reconstructed, 49 used AlloDerm, 110 used DM, 62 used FHD, and 64 used no ADM. The total complication rate with AlloDerm was 22% [95% confidence interval (CI), 11–34], with DM was 15% (95% CI, 8–21), and with FHD was 18% (95% CI, 8–28) (P = 0.47). Infectious complication rates for AlloDerm, DM, and FHD were equal at 10% (P = 0.97). The total complication rate of all ADM reconstructions as a grouped cohort was 17% compared to 11% without ADM (P = 0.48). The overall incidence of infectious complications with ADM was 10% compared to 2% without ADM (P = 0.09). There is no difference in the clinically significant overall complication rate or incidence of infection between AlloDerm, DM, and FHD. Isolating infectious complications, there is a trend toward increased incidence with ADM compared to reconstructions without.

Analysis of clinically significant seroma formation in breast reconstruction using acellular dermal grafts.

AbstractWith a rise in tissue expander-based breast reconstructions (TEBRs) using acellular dermal matrix (ADM), we have seen an increase in ADM-specific complications. In this study, we aimed to evaluate clinically significant seroma (CSS) formation—defined by the need for a drainage procedure—to determine if there was a difference in incidence between product types: AlloDerm (AL), DermaMatrix (DM), and FlexHD (FHD). This was a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent TEBR at a single institution. The total number of reconstructed breasts was separated into the following 4 groups according to the product type: AL, DM, FHD, or no ADM. We identified the total number of CSSs and compared these data between product types. A logistic regression was performed in an attempt to identify independent risk factors associated with seroma formation. In total, we identified 284 consecutive TEBRs. Overall, there were 17 (7.7%) seromas in 220 breast reconstructions in which ADM was used. When comparing the number of CSS between groups—AL (n = 2, 4.0%), DM (n = 6, 5.4%), FHD (n = 9, 14.75%), and no ADM (n = 1, 1.5%)—we found a significant difference in seroma incidence between product types (P = 0.016). Multivariate analysis identified a strong trend toward FHD as an independent predictor of seroma formation (P = 0.061). Our review suggests that there is strong trend in CSS formation with the use of FHD as compared to other product types and reconstructions in which no ADM was used.

Prospective, randomized evaluation of endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release in bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome: an interim analysis.

BackgroundMost randomized trials have shown similar results with endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR); however, there are studies suggesting less postoperative pain, faster improvement in grip and pinch strength, and earlier return to work with the endoscopic technique. The goal of this study was to prospectively examine subjective and functional outcomes, satisfaction, and complications after both ECTR and OCTR in the opposite hands of the same patient, serving as their own control. MethodsThis was a prospective, randomized study in which patients underwent surgery for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. The first carpal tunnel release was performed on the most symptomatic hand—determined by the patient. Operative approach was randomly assigned and, approximately 1 month later, the alternative technique was performed on the contralateral side. Demographic data were obtained, and functional outcomes were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively, including pain score, 2-point discrimination, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing, thenar strength, and overall grip strength. The carpal tunnel syndrome-functional status score and carpal tunnel syndrome-symptom severity score were recorded before surgery and at 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively. Overall satisfaction with each technique was recorded at the conclusion of the study. ResultsCurrently, 25 subjects have completed final visit testing. There were no differences in pain score, 2-point discrimination, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing, thenar strength, or overall grip strength at any of the postoperative time points. Carpal tunnel syndrome-symptom severity score and carpal tunnel syndrome-functional status score were not significantly different between groups at any of the evaluations. Overall satisfaction, where patients recorded a number from 0 to 100, was significantly greater in the ECTR group (95.95 vs 91.60, P = 0.04). There were no complications with either technique. DiscussionThis interim analysis, using the same patient as an internal control, suggests that both OCTR and ECTR are well tolerated with no differences in functional outcomes, symptom severity and functional status questionnaires, or complications. Although there were no differences between groups using our study metrics, patients still preferred the ECTR, demonstrated by significantly higher overall satisfaction scores at the conclusion of the study.

A Multidisciplinary Evaluation of Prescribing Practices for Prophylactic Antibiotics in Operative and Nonoperative Facial Fractures.

Background:Evidence supports short-term perioperative prophylaxis for facial fractures. It is unknown, however, whether there is any professional consensus on how to manage these injuries. No multidisciplinary evaluation of the prophylactic antibiotic prescribing patterns for neither operative nor nonoperative facial fractures has been performed. Aim:To evaluate the prophylactic antibiotic prescribing patterns of multiple specialties in operative and nonoperative facial fractures. Methods:A 14 question anonymous online-based survey was distributed to members of the American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons (ASMS) and the American Association of Facial Plastic Surgeons to evaluate current practices. Results and Conclusions:205 respondents, including 89 plastic surgeons, 98 otolaryngologists, 12 oral and maxillofacial surgeons, and 7 with double board certification practicing throughout the United States with ranging experience from 11 to 30 years. As expected, preoperative, perioperative, or postoperative prophylactic antibiotics are either “always” or “sometimes” prescribed, 100% of the time with more varied practice upon further inspection. A total of 85.1% either “always” or “sometimes” use antibiotics while awaiting surgery. Dentate segment fractures are the most frequent type of facial fractures to receive prophylactic antibiotics for both operative (90.5%) and nonoperative (84.1%) fractures. Duration of antibiotic use is more varied with the majority providing 3 to 7 days despite current evidence. First generation cephalosporins alone are prescribed by 49% of respondents, which may not adequately cover oral flora. There is no multidisciplinary consensus for prophylactic antibiotics for specific operative fracture types or nonoperative facial fractures, an area with little published evidence.

Pedicled rectus femoris flap for coverage of complex open pelvic fractures

Complex open pelvic fractures are highly morbid injuries. Distant soft tissue transfer is often necessary for reconstruction. We report two cases of traumatic open pelvic fractures in which a pedicled rectus femoris flap was used for soft tissue coverage. Two patients presented with complex open pelvic fractures resulting from blunt trauma. In both patients a pedicled rectus femoris flap was used to reconstruct the full thickness soft tissue defect. Both patients had complete soft tissue coverage of the anterior pelvic defect allowing definitive pelvic fracture fixation. No significant donor site morbidity was associated with either patient post operatively. The well described pedicled rectus femoris flaps reliable anatomy, ease of harvest, and versatility as well as acceptable donor site morbidity makes this flap ideal for the reconstruction of complex open anterior pelvic fractures with full thickness soft tissue defects when other local flaps or free tissue transfer is not an option.

Should surgeons use arm restraints after cleft surgery

BackgroundMost cleft surgeons require children to wear postoperative arm restraints although the literature suggests that there is no difference in early complications. The aim of this study was to determine if the use of postoperative arm restraints was effective in preventing early postoperative complications. MethodsWe reviewed 120 consecutive primary cleft surgeries in which 1 surgeon used arm restraints in all patients and the other surgeon did not. Demographic information was obtained and complications were reviewed. We compared infection, fistula, and dehiscence between the 2 groups. ResultsIn 120 primary cleft surgeries, there was no difference in early complications in patients who were required to wear arm restraints versus those who were not (P < 0.05). DiscussionArm restraints are unnecessary and may cause distress in both patients and their families. Eliminating arm restraints from cleft care would save the health care system an estimated

Improving Effective Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Application in Soft Tissue Wrist Injury

234,000 annually.

Direct Cost Comparison of Open Carpal Tunnel Release in Different Venues

Introduction: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for soft-tissue wrist injury may be overprescribed, contributing to ineffective health care resource use. We aimed to discern predictive factors that may improve MRIs application in soft-tissue wrist injury. Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of adults who underwent MRIs for possible soft-tissue wrist injury between June 2009 and June 2014. Clinical data and treatment recommendations before and after MRI were analyzed. If the MRI-directed treatment recommendation was different from before MRI, the MRI was noted to have influenced the patients treatment (Impact MRI). Results: Among 140 MRI scans, 39 (28%) impacted treatment recommendation. Twenty-six Impact MRIs were ordered by hand surgeons, whereas 13 were ordered by referring physicians (P = .001). More Impact MRIs were found when an MRI was ordered for patients younger than 36 years (P = .01), within 6 weeks of symptom onset (P = .03), to question a specific anatomic injury (P = .0001), or by a board-certified hand surgeon (P = .001). Adjusting for other covariates, these 4 clinical factors were identified as independent predictive factors to Impact MRIs. Conclusions: MRIs for soft-tissue wrist injuries may more likely change management when the patient is younger, ordered within 6 weeks of symptom onset, and prescribed with a specific differential diagnosis. Referral to a hand surgeon should be considered before wrist MRI for the following patients: history of hand surgery/trauma, older than 36 years likely due to confounding chronic wrist changes, symptomatic for more than 6 weeks, and without clear differential diagnoses for the symptoms.

Abstract 39. A Comparison of Open versus Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release within the Same Patient

Background: The increased efficiency and cost savings have led many surgeons to move their practice away from the traditional operating room (OR) or outpatient surgery center (OSC) and into the clinic setting. With the cost of health care continuing to rise, the venue with the lowest cost should be utilized. We performed a direct cost analysis of a single surgeon performing an open carpal tunnel release in the OR, OSC, and clinic. Methods: Four treatment groups were prospectively studied: the hospital OR with monitored anesthesia care (OR-MAC), OSC with MAC (OSC-MAC), OSC with local anesthesia (OSC-local), and clinic with local anesthesia (clinic). To determine direct costs, a detailed inventory was recorded including the weight and disposal of medical waste. Indirect costs were not included. Results: Five cases in each treatment group were prospectively recorded. Average direct costs were OR (

Abstract 66: Is Vicryl Mesh Really a Safe Alternative to Acellular Dermis in Tissue Expander-based Breast Reconstruction?

213.75), OSC-MAC (