Background This study examines the effect of prior abdominal surgery on flap, donor-site, and overall complications in women undergoing deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction and assesses whether preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) affects outcomes. Methods All DIEP flaps performed at our institution between 2004 and 2015 were identified retrospectively. Patients were stratified based on a history of prior abdominal surgery and whether or not they underwent a preoperative CTA. A subgroup analysis was performed to compare operative times and incidence of complications using adjusted odds ratios (ORs). Results Over a 12-year period, 425 patients (640 flaps) had prior abdominal surgery, and 393 patients (547 flaps) had no prior abdominal surgery. Of the patients with previous abdominal surgery, 67 (15.7%) underwent preoperative CTA and 333 (78.4%) did not. Patients with prior abdominal surgery were more likely to have donor-site wound complications (OR: 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15–2.87, p = 0.01), fat necrosis ≥2cm of the transferred flap (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.0–1.94, p = 0.05), and were more likely to have bilateral DIEP flap reconstruction (OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.22–2.12, p < 0.001). Preoperative CTA did not reduce the risk of complications and did not affect operative times. Conclusion DIEP flap reconstruction can be safely performed in women with prior abdominal surgery. However, these patients should be counseled that they are at an increased risk for donor-site wound breakdown and fat necrosis of the reconstructed breast. Preoperative CTA does not reduce complication rate, overall operative time, or time needed to dissect perforators in women with abdominal scars.

No abstract

Background: Autologous fat transfer is common in breast reconstruction because of its versatility for use in contour deformities. The authors examined three different fat grafting processing techniques for complications and safety profile using their institutional database. Methods: Retrospective review was performed of patients from a single institution who had undergone autologous fat transfer following breast reconstruction from 2012 to 2016. Individuals were separated into three cohorts according to fat harvest technique: (1) centrifugation, (2) Telfa gauze, or (3) Revolve. Complications between the groups were assessed. Results: A total of 267 cases of autologous fat transfer were identified (centrifugation, n = 168; Telfa, n = 44; and Revolve, n = 55). Grafting by means of centrifugation was associated with the greatest incidence of oil cysts (12.5 percent; p = 0.034), postoperative adverse events observed in the clinic (13.7 percent; p = 0.002), and total complications (25.6 percent; p = 0.001). The use of Telfa resulted in the lowest rates of oil cyst formation (0 percent; p = 0.002) and total complications (2.3 percent; p = 0.001). Grafting by means of centrifugation was also associated with the highest frequency of repeated injections among the three techniques after initial grafting (19.6 percent; p = 0.029). In contrast, Revolve demonstrated a repeated injection rate of just 5.45 percent, significantly lower when independently compared with centrifugation (p = 0.011). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that higher total graft volume (p = 0.002) and the use of centrifugation (p = 0.002) were significant risk factors for adverse events seen in the clinic postoperatively. Conclusions: Significant differences in postoperative outcomes exist between varying fat transfer techniques. Autologous fat transfer by means of centrifugation harbored the highest rates of complication, whereas Telfa and Revolve exhibited similar safety profiles. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Background: The goals of this study were to analyze and compare breast implant preferences between US and European surgeons in terms of size, shape, and surface texturing. Furthermore, we set out to investigate the impact of BIA-ALCL scientific publications on surgeon practice patterns. Methods: Breast implant sales data from the USA and Europe dating from June 2013 to September 2018 were provided by one of the world’s leading breast implant manufactures (Mentor Worldwide LLC). Change-point analysis was used to identify when significant changes in sales trends occurred. These changes were compared with dates of government announcements and publications of landmark scientific articles regarding BIA-ALCL. Results: Our data demonstrate that US surgeons tend to prefer larger, smooth round implants compared with European surgeons, who prefer smaller, textured round implants. Despite these differences, medium-sized implants were still the most common size used between both regions. Sales trends illustrate an increase in smooth implants and a decrease in textured implants for both regions. Significant changes in trends align with publication dates of announcements and landmark scientific articles. Conclusions: We demonstrate definitive differences in implant preferences between the USA and Europe. We encourage physicians to continue their pursuit of publishing because it seems these publications affect medical device selection.