Melissa A. Crosby

The role of hyaluronic acid fillers (Restylane) in facial cosmetic surgery: review and technical considerations.

Background: Bioengineered hyaluronic acid derivatives are currently available that provide for safe and effective soft-tissue augmentation in the comprehensive approach to nonsurgical facial rejuvenation. Current hyaluronic acid fillers do not require preinjection skin testing and produce reproducible, longer-lasting, nonpermanent results compared with other fillers, such as collagen. Methods: A review of the authors’ extensive experience at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center was conducted to formulate the salient requirements for successful utilization of hyaluronic acid fillers. Indications, technical refinements, and key components for optimized product administration categorized by anatomical location are described. The efficacy and longevity of results are also discussed. Results: Bioengineered hyaluronic acid fillers allow for safe and effective augmentation of selected anatomical regions of the face, when properly administered. Combined treatment with botulinum toxin type A can enhance the effects and longevity by as much as 50 percent. Key components to optimal filler administration include proper anatomical evaluation, changing or combining various fillers based on particle size, altering the depth of injection, using different injection techniques, and coadministration of botulinum toxin type A when indicated. Concomitant administration of hyaluronic acid fillers along with surgical methods of facial rejuvenation can serve as a powerful tool in maximizing a comprehensive treatment plan. Conclusions: Current techniques in nonsurgical facial rejuvenation and shaping with hyaluronic acid fillers are safe, effective, and long-lasting. Combination regimens that include surgical facial rejuvenation techniques and/or coadministration of botulinum toxin type A further optimize results, leading to greater patient satisfaction.

Optimal timing of delayed free lower abdominal flap breast reconstruction after postmastectomy radiation therapy

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal timing of delayed abdominal free flap breast reconstruction following postmastectomy radiation therapy. The authors evaluated the association between timing of delayed abdominal free flap breast reconstruction following postmastectomy radiation therapy and postoperative complications. Methods: The authors reviewed a prospectively maintained database of delayed abdominal free flap breast reconstruction performed between July of 2005 and December of 2009. Data regarding demographics, operative variables, and clinical outcomes were collected. Patients were classified as having undergone reconstruction less than 12 months after postmastectomy radiation therapy (group I) or 12 months or more after postmastectomy radiation therapy (group II). Complications were compared between groups, including microvascular thrombosis, flap loss, reoperation, wound dehiscence, and fat necrosis. Results: One hundred eighty-nine patients were identified, 82 (43.4 percent) in group I and 107 (56.6 percent) in group II. The total flap loss rate was 2.6 percent, with all flap losses occurring in group I (p = 0.014). The reoperation rate was higher in group I (14.6 percent versus 4.7 percent; p = 0.022). In addition, group I patients trended toward a higher incidence of microvascular thrombosis, infection, and wound dehiscence. Conclusions: Patients who underwent delayed abdominal free flap breast reconstruction after 12 months from the completion of postmastectomy radiation therapy developed fewer complications, including microvascular thrombosis and total flap loss, than those who underwent delayed abdominal free flap breast reconstruction within 12 months of completing postmastectomy radiation therapy. Allowing an interval of 12 months between the completion of postmastectomy radiation therapy and delayed abdominal free flap breast reconstruction will likely minimize complications and optimize outcomes in free flap breast reconstruction in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation.

Association between contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and breast cancer outcomes by hormone receptor status

The effect of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) on the survival of patients with early‐stage breast cancer remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the benefits of CPM using a propensity scoring approach that reduces selection bias from the nonrandom assignment of patients in observational studies.

Impact of Surgical Techniques, Biomaterials, and Patient Variables on Rate of Nipple Necrosis after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Background: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is appropriate for selected patients with early-stage breast cancer or high breast cancer risk. However, the postoperative rate of nipple necrosis is relatively high (10 to 30 percent). This study analyzed the impact of clinicopathologic and surgical variables on partial and total nipple necrosis rates after nipple-sparing mastectomy and compared overall complication rates between nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy. Methods: The study included 233 cases; 113 had nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction and 120 were matched cases of skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction performed at the authors’ institution from September of 2003 through May of 2011. Results: The overall complication rate was 28 percent for nipple-sparing mastectomy and 27 percent for skin-sparing mastectomy (p > 0.99). In patients who did not have axillary surgery (those undergoing risk-reducing mastectomy), the overall rate was significantly higher in the nipple-sparing group (26 percent versus 9 percent; p = 0.06). However, in patients who had axillary surgery (either sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary lymphadenectomy), the rate did not differ between the two groups. For nipple-sparing mastectomy, the overall incidence of any (partial or total) nipple necrosis was 20 percent. Only two cases (2 percent) had total necrosis. Larger breasts (C cup or larger) were associated with a higher rate of nipple necrosis (p = 0.003). Conclusions: The authors found no significant difference in the overall incidence of complications in patients who had nipple-sparing mastectomy or skin-sparing mastectomy. Exclusion of axillary lymphatic surgery in nipple-sparing mastectomy patients did not decrease the incidence of complications. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Use of herbal supplements and vitamins in plastic surgery: a practical review.

Learning Objectives: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Explain what governmental regulations control the labeling and distribution of herbal supplements. 2. List the more commonly used supplements and their reported benefits. 3. List the possible postoperative complications from consumption of the more commonly used herbal supplements. 4. Explain the preoperative management of patients using herbal supplements. 5. Know additional resources to consult when unanswered questions arise. Background: The American public spends over

Pediatric mandibular reconstruction using a vascularized fibula flap

5 billion per year on herbal supplements, and approximately 20 percent of all Americans use prescription medications concurrently with herbal supplements. As the number of people who take alternative medicines rises, there is growing awareness among health care providers of the need to become educated and to educate their patients on the effects that such supplementation may have on their health. As plastic surgeons, we have an added responsibility to become informed because of potential adverse interactions with other medications and anesthesia in the elective surgical patient. Methods: Literature regarding commonly encountered herbal supplements and vitamins was reviewed and summarized to include reported indications for use and potential adverse effects and interactions specific to the perioperative patient. Results: Abundant literature exists regarding herbal supplementation, but very little scientific evidence exists to advocate the use of the majority of supplements available on the market. In addition, little is known about the positive and negative interactions that these supplements are capable of producing, and those interactions that are known are based on case reports. Conclusions: With the lack of quality scientific studies to support the efficacy of most herbal products available and the limited regulation of these products by the government, health care providers are faced with a significant public health dilemma. This article provides a brief overview of information published on commonly encountered herbal supplements and vitamins taken by plastic surgery patients.

Reply: reduced incidence of breast cancer-related lymphedema following mastectomy and breast reconstruction versus mastectomy alone.

The purpose of this study was to address questions concerning the functional outcome following mandibular reconstruction with vascularized fibula flap in skeletally immature children

Immediate breast reconstruction and lymphedema incidence.

Background: As breast cancer survivorship has increased, so has an awareness of the morbidities associated with its treatment. The incidence of breast cancer–related lymphedema has been reported to be 8 to 30 percent in all breast cancer survivors. To determine whether breast cancer reconstruction has an impact on the incidence of breast cancer–related lymphedema, the authors compared its incidence in patients who underwent mastectomy with reconstruction versus mastectomy alone. Methods: All patients who underwent mastectomy, with or without immediate breast reconstruction, between 2001 and 2006, were identified through a search of prospective institutional databases. To reduce variation caused by known predictive factors, the individuals were cross-matched for age, axillary intervention, and postoperative axillary irradiation. The incidence of lymphedema was based on the presence of arm edema that lasted more than 6 months and was documented clinically. Results: Of the 574 cross-matched patients included in the study, 78 (6.8 percent) developed lymphedema (21 with reconstructed breasts and 57 with unreconstructed breasts). Patients who did not undergo reconstruction were significantly more likely to develop breast cancer–related lymphedema (9.9 percent versus 3.7 percent; p < 0.001). Postoperative axillary radiation therapy (p < 0.001), one or more positive lymph nodes (p = 0.010), and body mass index of 25 or greater (p = 0.021) were also associated with an increased incidence of lymphedema. Reconstruction patients developed lymphedema significantly later than nonreconstruction patients (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients who undergo breast reconstruction have a lower incidence and a delay in onset of breast cancer–related lymphedema compared with patients who undergo mastectomy alone. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Developing a theoretical framework to illustrate associations among patient satisfaction, body image and quality of life for women undergoing breast reconstruction

Background: As breast cancer survivorship increases, more women are being affected by treatment sequelae, including lymphedema. The purpose of this study was to evaluate lymphedema incidence among immediate breast reconstruction patients and determine what factors are associated with lymphedema, including reconstruction method. Methods: The authors reviewed the outcomes of all consecutive patients who underwent immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction at their institution between 2001 and 2006. Patient, treatment, and outcome characteristics were compared among reconstruction types: expander and implant, latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap and implant, and autologous flap alone. Regression models were used to determine whether patient and treatment characteristics were associated with lymphedema development. Results: This study included 1117 patients (1499 breasts), with a mean follow-up of 56 months. Axillary interventions (p < 0.001), high numbers of positive lymph nodes (p = 0.004), postoperative radiation therapy (p = 0.007), and body mass index of 25 kg/m2 or greater (p = 0.010) were strong predictors of increased lymphedema incidence. After excluding prophylactic mastectomy and reconstruction group changes, the authors found that the mean lymphedema incidence was 4.0 percent (of 1013 breasts). Reconstruction type had no significant effect on incidence of or time to lymphedema, and no interaction was found between axillary intervention and reconstruction type (p = 0.799). Conclusions: The incidence of lymphedema after immediate reconstruction was associated with high body mass index, axillary interventions, and high numbers of positive lymph nodes. The reconstructive method did not appear to affect lymphedema incidence or timing. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Comprehensive Evaluation of Risk Factors and Management of Impending Flap Loss in 2138 Breast Free Flaps.

Within the field of breast reconstruction there is increasing focus on patient-reported outcomes related to satisfaction, body image, and quality of life. These outcomes are deemed highly relevant because the primary goal of breast reconstruction is to recreate the appearance of a breast (or breasts) that is satisfying to the patient. Prominent researchers have suggested the need to develop improved standards for outcome evaluation which can ultimately benefit patients as well as physicians. The purpose of this article is to summarize key findings in the area of patient-reported outcomes for breast reconstruction and introduce a theoretical framework for advancing research in this field. We conducted an extensive literature review of outcome studies for breast reconstruction focusing on patient-reported results. We developed a theoretical framework illustrating core patient-reported outcomes related to breast reconstruction and factors associated with these outcomes. Our theoretical model highlights domains and distinguishing features of patient satisfaction, body image, and quality of life outcomes for women undergoing breast reconstruction. This model further identifies a broad range of variables (e.g., historical/premorbid influences, disease and treatment-related factors) that have been found to influence patient-reported outcomes and need to be taken into consideration when designing future research in this area. Additional attention is given to examining the relationship between patient reported outcomes and outside evaluation of breast reconstruction. Our proposed theoretical framework suggests key opportunities to expand research in this area with the goal of optimizing body image adjustment, satisfaction, and psychosocial outcomes for the individual patient.