Background Laser skin resurfacing with erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) lasers is a newer alternative to CO2 laser treatment, and was developed to reduce common complications. Although Er:YAG lasers have been available for years, safety parameters for efficacious resurfacing with these devices have not previously been available. Objectives The aim of this study was to utilize one practice’s laser treatment settings and outcomes data to identify complication rates for various energies and areas of the face and to offer safe energy/depth parameters for treating each area. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed for full-field confluent laser resurfacing patients treated with a Sciton Contour Tunable Resurfacing Er:YAG laser by the senior author. The data were retroactively analyzed with a time range of 8 years (January 2007-December 2015). Results The overall complication rate for MicroLaserPeels (ablation of 50 µm or less) was 10.1% (20 of 198 treatments) and the rate for deep resurfacing treatments was 26.5% (71 of 268 cases). In MicroLaserPeel treatments the cheek area had the highest complication rate, followed by the forehead, nose, perioral, and eyelid areas, in that order (complication rate range, 0%-9.1%). In deep resurfacing treatments the perioral area had the highest complication rate, 38.6% of 145 cases. This was followed by the lids, cheek, nose, and forehead, in that order (complication rate range, 15.2%-20.9%). There is a correlation between increased depth of ablation and increased rate of complication. Conclusions The study confirmed the efficacy of Er:YAG resurfacing and provides guidance for a safer approach to excellent outcomes. Level of Evidence: 4

No abstract

BACKGROUND:The integrated plastic surgery residency match continues to be highly competitive. Every year, some candidates are former NCAA athletes. While it is challenging to balance academic and athletic responsibilities, participation in NCAA sports may be predictive of continued success. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of participation in collegiate athletics on applicant anticipated rank and academic success.

BackgroundPatients with breast cancer living in rural areas are less likely to undergo breast reconstruction. Further, given the additional training and resources required for autologous reconstruction, it is likely that rural patients face barriers to accessing these surgical options. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine if there are disparities in autologous breast reconstruction care among rural patients on the national level.MethodsThe Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database was queried from 2012 to 2019 using ICD9/10 codes for breast cancer diagnoses and autologous breast reconstruction. The resulting data set was analyzed for patient, hospital, and complication‐specific information with counties comprised of less than 10,000 inhabitants classified as rural.ResultsFrom 2012 to 2019, 89,700 weighted encounters for autologous breast reconstruction involved patients who lived in non‐rural areas, while 3605 involved patients from rural counties. The majority of rural patients underwent reconstruction at urban teaching hospitals. However, rural patients were more likely than non‐rural patients to have their surgery at a rural hospital (6.8% vs. 0.7%). Rural‐county residing patients had lower odds of receiving a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap compared to non‐rural‐county residing patients (OR 0.51 CI: 0.48–0.55, p < .0001). Further, rural patients were more likely to experience infection and wound disruption than urban patients (p < .05), regardless of where they underwent surgery. Complication rates were similar among rural patients who received care at rural hospitals versus urban hospitals (p > .05). Meanwhile, the cost of autologous breast reconstruction was higher (p = .011) for rural patients at an urban hospital ($30,066.2, SD19,965.5) than at a rural hospital ($25,049.5, SD12,397.2).ConclusionPatients living in rural areas face disparities in health care, including lower odds of being potentially offered gold‐standard breast reconstruction treatments. Increased microsurgical option availability and patient education in rural areas may help alleviate current disparities in breast reconstruction.