Immediate Bilateral Breast Reconstruction Using Abdominally Based Flaps: An Analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database

A Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Immediate, Delayed Immediate, and Delayed Autologous Free Flap Breast Reconstruction: Analysis of 2010-2020 NSQIP Data

BACKGROUND

 While many factors influence decisions related to the timing between mastectomy and flap-based breast reconstruction, there is limited literature comparing postoperative complications between immediate (IBR), delayed immediate (DIBR), and delayed (DBR) reconstruction modalities. Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), we sought to compare postoperative complication rates of each timing modality.

METHODS

 The NSQIP 2010-2020 database was queried for patients who underwent free flap breast reconstruction. Cases were categorized to include mastectomy performed concurrently with a free flap reconstruction, removal of a tissue expander with free flap reconstruction, and free flap reconstruction alone which are defined as IBR, DIBR, and DBR, respectively. The frequency of postoperative outcomes including surgical site infection (SSI), wound dehiscence, intraoperative transfusion, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and return to operating room (OR) was assessed. Overall complication rates, hospital length of stay (LOS), and operative time were analyzed. Multivariable regression analysis controlling for age, race, BMI, diabetes, hypertension, ASA class, and laterality was performed.

RESULTS

 A total of 7,907 cases that underwent IBR, DIBR (n = 976), and DBR reconstruction (n = 6,713) were identified. No statistical difference in occurrence of SSIs, wound dehiscence, or DVT was identified. DIBR (9%) and DBR (11.9%) were associated with less occurrences of reoperation than IBR (13.2%, p < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that DIBR and DBR were associated with a lower odds of complications and shorter operation time versus IBR. No statistically significant differences between DIBR and DBR in surgical complications, LOS, and operative time were identified.

CONCLUSION

 Awareness of overall complication rates associated with each reconstructive timing modality can be used to help guide physicians when discussing reconstructive options. Our data suggests that DIBR and DBR are associated with less overall complications than IBR. Physicians should continue to consider patients' unique circumstances when deciding upon which timing modality is appropriate.

Increased Production of Abdominal Donor Site Fluid Following Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction With Superficial Inferior Epigastric Artery Versus Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator Flaps

Introduction and aims Donor site seroma following abdominal flap harvest for breast reconstruction is common in both deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) and superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps. We tested the hypothesis that there is increased donor site fluid following SIEA dissection compared to DIEP. Materials and methods Of60 SIEA breast reconstructions performed by one surgeon in 50 patients (2004-2019), complete data were available for 31 patients. Eighteen unilateral SIEAs were matched with 18 unilateral DIEPs. Thirteen bilateral flap harvests involving an SIEA were matched with 13 bilateral DIEP controls. Their cumulative abdominal drain outputs, times to drain removal, hospital stay, and number and volume of seroma aspirations were compared. Results Patients who underwent an SIEA flap harvest had significantly increased drain output compared to only a DIEP flap harvest (SIEA=1,078 mL, DIEP=500 mL, p<0.001), which remained significant after controlling for confounding variables (p=0.002). There was increased time until drain removal (SIEA=11 days, DIEP=6 days, p=0.010), and patients who underwent an SIEA harvest were 14 times more likely to be discharged with a drain in situ (odds ratio (OR)=14.6, 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.8203-75.9565, p=0.0014). There was no significant difference in the number or volume of outpatient aspirations, length of hospital admission, or total seroma volume. Conclusion This study demonstrated that SIEA harvest is a significant predictor of increased abdominal drain output postoperatively. This accounted for longer periods before drain removal and more patients discharged with an abdominal drain in situ and should be an important consideration for reconstructive surgeons. There was no demonstrable difference in the number or volume of seroma aspirations after drain removal for either group.

Morbidity of the Donor Site and Complication Rates of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Abdominal Flaps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. Numerous studies have evaluated the use of autologous abdominal tissue for breast reconstruction; nevertheless, complications and donor site morbidity rates vary significantly. The study aims to compare the literature regarding morbidity of the donor site and complication rates of breast reconstruction with autologous abdominal flaps. Methods. The databases of MEDLINE, EBSCO, Scopus, Wiley Library, and Web of Sciences were searched for studies that compared different flaps in terms of complications and donor site morbidity. The procedures studied included pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap (pTRAM), free TRAM (fTRAM), deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP), and superficial inferior epigastric artery perforator (SIEA) flaps. A total of 34 studies were included. Of these, 28 were retrospective studies and 9 were prospective cohort studies. Results. When compared to DIEP, fTRAM flaps were found to have a decreased incidence of flap fat necrosis, hematoma, and total thrombotic events, yet a higher risk of donor site hernia/bulging. pTRAM flaps were also associated with an increased risk of hernia/bulging at the donor site, as well as wound infection, yet flap hematoma was less common. On the other hand, SIEA flaps showed the lowest risk of donor site hernia/bulging while still having a high risk of wound infection. Conclusion. fTRAM procedures comparatively had the least complications. However, regarding flap choice, patients would benefit most from a case-by-case analysis, taking into consideration individual risk factors and preferences.

National Trends in Length of Stay for Microvascular Breast Reconstruction: An Evaluation of 10,465 Cases Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

BACKGROUND

Decreasing length of stay benefits patients and hospital systems alike. This should be accomplished safely without negatively impacting patient outcomes. The authors hypothesize that in the United States, the average length of stay for patients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction has decreased since 2012 without a concurrent increase in complication and readmission rates.

METHODS

The authors identified female patients who underwent microvascular breast reconstruction (CPT 19364) from the 2012 to 2018 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Trends in complication and readmission rates and length of stay were examined over 7 years. Multivariable logistic regression models and Mann-Kendall trend tests were used to evaluate associations between length of stay and complication and readmission rates.

RESULTS

A total of 10,465 cases were identified. The number of autologous microvascular breast reconstruction procedures performed increased annually between 2012 and 2018. Length of stay decreased significantly from 2012 to 2018 (from 4.47 days to 3.90 days) (p < 0.01). Minor and major complication rates remained constant, although major complications showed a decreasing trend (from 27 percent to 21 percent) (p = 0.07). Thirty-day readmission, surgical-site infection, and wound dehiscence rates remained consistent over the study period, whereas rates of blood transfusion or bleeding decreased (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a national sample from 2012 to 2018, the authors observed a significant decrease in length of stay for patients undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction without a concurrent increase in complication and readmission rates. Current efforts to reduce length of stay have been successful without increasing complication or readmission rates.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Objective photographic assessments and comparisons of immediate bilateral breast reconstruction using deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps and implants

Background

The increasing number of bilateral breast cancer patients has been accompanied by a growing need for bilateral mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. However, little research has investigated the complications and aesthetic outcomes related to bilateral reconstruction. Therefore, we analyzed retrospective data comparing the outcomes of bilateral reconstruction using deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps or implants.

Methods

This study included 52 patients (24 DIEP group and 28 implant group) who underwent bilateral mastectomy with immediate reconstruction between 2010 and 2020. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and complications were recorded. The difference between the left and right position of the nipple-areolar complex with respect to the sternal notch point at the clavicle was measured, and breast symmetry was evaluated.

Results

The average weight of breasts reconstructed with DIEP flaps (417.43±152.50 g) was higher than that of breasts with implants. The hospitalization period and operation time were significantly longer in the DIEP group. Early complications were significantly more common in the implant group (36.53%) than in the DIEP group. The angles between the nipples and the horizontal line were 1.09°±0.71° and 1.75°±1.45° in the DIEP and implant groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Although the surgical burden is lower, breast reconstruction using implants requires greater attention with respect to implant positioning, asymmetry, and complications than DIEP flap reconstruction. DIEP flap reconstruction has a prolonged operation time and a high risk of flap failure, but yields excellent cosmetic results and does not require intensive follow-up. Patients should be consulted to determine the most suitable option for them.

Uni-vs. bilateral DIEP flap reconstruction - A multicenter outcome analysis

OBJECTIVE

Over the past decade numbers of bilateral mastectomy have increased steadily. As a result, bilateral breast reconstruction is gaining popularity. The presented study compares complications and outcomes of unilateral and bilateral DIEP free-flap breast reconstructions using the largest database available in Europe.

METHODS

Female breast cancer patients (n = 3926) receiving DIEP flap breast reconstructions (n = 4577 free flaps) at 22 different centers were included in this study. Free flaps were stratified into two groups: a unilateral- (UL) and a bilateral- (BL) breast reconstruction group. Groups were compared with regard to surgical complications and free flap outcome.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was significantly longer in the BL group (UL: 285.2 ± 107.7 vs. BL: 399.1 ± 136.8 min; p < 0.001). Mean ischemia time was comparable between groups (p = 0.741). There was no significant difference with regard to total (UL 1.8% vs. BL 2.6%, p = 0.081) or partial flap loss (UL 1.2% vs. BL 0.9%, p = 0.45) between both groups. Rates of venous or arterial thrombosis were comparable between both groups (venous: UL 2.9% vs. BL 2.2%, p = 0.189; arterial: UL 1.8% vs. BL 1.2%, p = 0.182). However, significantly higher rates of hematoma at the donor and recipient site were observed in the UL group (donor site: UL 1.1% vs. BL 0.1%, p = 0.001; recipient site UL 3.9% vs. BL 1.7%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The data underline the feasibility of bilateral DIEP flap reconstruction, when performed in a setting of specialized centers.

Complications and Patient-reported Outcomes after TRAM and DIEP Flaps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) and deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps are the most common abdominally based breast reconstruction procedures. Each technique has its advantages and disadvantages; however, how morbidity relates to satisfaction is not well-understood. Our aim was to compare complications and patient-reported outcomes following pedicled TRAM (pTRAM), free TRAM (fTRAM), and DIEP flaps to guide flap selection.

Racial Disparities in Outcomes of Reconstructive Breast Surgery: An Analysis of 51,362 Patients from the ACS-NSQIP

BACKGROUND

 In various surgical specialties, racial disparities in postoperative complications are widely reported. It is assumed that the effect of race can also be found in plastic surgical outcomes, although this remains largely undefined in literature. This study aims to provide data on the impact of race on outcomes of reconstructive breast surgery.

METHODS

 Data were collected using the NSQIP (National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) database (2008-2016). Outcomes of the reconstructive breast surgery of White patients were compared with those of African American, Asian, or other races. Logistic regression was performed to control for variations between all groups. Analysis of racial disparities was further sub-stratified according to four different types of breast reconstruction: delayed or immediate autologous, and delayed or immediate prosthesis-based reconstruction.

RESULTS

 In total, this study included 51,362 patients of which 43,864 were Caucasian, 5,135 African American, 2,057 Asian, and 332 of other races. When compared with White patients, patients of African American race had larger body mass indices (31.3 ± 7.0 vs. 27.6 ± 6.3, p-value < 0.001) in addition to higher rates of diabetes (12.3 vs 4.6%, p-value < 0.001) and hypertension (44.7 vs. 23.4%, p-value < 0.001). Both multivariate analysis and the sub-stratified analysis of different types of reconstruction showed no differences in overall complication rate.

CONCLUSION

 Among the four types of reconstructive procedures, differences in surgical outcomes do not appear to be based on race and therefore seem to be less evident in reconstructive breast surgery compared with the current literature within other surgical specialties.

Concurrent Ventral Hernia Repair Is Effective in Patients Undergoing Abdominally Based Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction

Background The abdomen remains the most preferable donor site for autologous breast reconstruction. Many patients in this population will have had prior abdominal surgery, which is the chief risk factor for having a ventral hernia. While prior studies have examined the impact of prior abdominal surgery on breast reconstruction, limited data exist on the management of patients with a preexisting ventral hernia. The objective of this study was to investigate outcomes of performing ventral hernia repair concurrent with abdominally based microsurgical breast reconstruction.

Methods A 5-year retrospective review of patients undergoing abdominally based microsurgical breast reconstruction was performed. The experimental group consisted of patients with a preexisting ventral hernia that was repaired at the time of breast reconstruction, and was compared with a historical cohort of patients without preexisting hernias.

Results There were a total of 18 and 225 patients in the experimental and control groups, respectively. There was a higher incidence of prior abdominal surgery in the experimental group (p = 0.0008), but no other differences. Mean follow-up was 20.5 ± 5.2 months. There were no instances of recurrent hernia or flap loss in the experimental group. No significant differences were observed between the experimental and control groups in the incidence of donor-site complications (27.8 vs. 20.9%, respectively; p = 0.55), recipient site complications (27.8 vs. 24.0%, respectively; p = 0.78), operative time (623 ± 114 vs. 598 ± 100 minutes, respectively; p = 0.80), or length of stay (3.4 ± 0.5 vs. 3.1 ± 0.4 days, respectively; p = 0.98).

Conclusion Concurrent ventral hernia repair at the time of abdominally based microsurgical breast reconstruction appears to be safe and effective. Larger studies are needed to further define this relationship.