Background Pressure injuries (PIs) after surgery affect thousands of people worldwide. Their management is expensive, a cost that can be reduced with proper preventive measures. Patients having surgery under general anaesthesia are at risk of developing PI, yet no specific tool has been developed to assess the risk in these patients. This review aimed to summarize the published data on perioperative risk factors associated with the development of PI in adults having surgery under general anaesthesia. Methods All studies reporting on risk factors associated with the development of PI were included. Data were extracted from all articles and meta‐analysis was performed when three or more studies reported on a specific variable. Results The analysis identified five factors significantly associated with the development of PIs: cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus, low haemoglobin level and longer duration of surgery. Factors not associated included serum albumin concentration, use of vasopressors during surgery, use of corticosteroids, sex and age. Conclusion Cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus, anaemia and duration of surgery should be taken into consideration when trying to identify surgical patients at high risk of developing PIs. These factors could be used to predict PIs after surgery.

This large systematic review and meta-analysis found a 28% increase in breast cancer-associated mortality in those who were current smokers compared to never smokers. The mortality in former smokers was equal to the one found in never smokers. This indicates that breast cancer patients ceasing to smoke can lower their risk of dying from their breast cancer disease dramatically, and possibly regain the risk of a never smoker.

Background: Postmastectomy pain syndrome is a common and disabling side effect of breast cancer treatment. Medical treatment seems to be insufficient for a considerable proportion of patients. Fat grafting has shown promise in relieving pain from postmastectomy pain syndrome, but no randomized clinical trial comparing fat grafting to a sham operation has been performed to date. The authors' objective was to compare the effect of fat grafting compared to a sham operation for treating postmastectomy pain syndrome. Methods: The authors conducted a single-center, double-blind, randomized clinical trial with two arms between October of 2017 and September of 2020. The authors assessed four patients suffering from postmastectomy pain syndrome for inclusion. The intervention group received scar-releasing rigottomy and fat grafting to the area of pain. The control group received scar-releasing rigottomy and a placebo of saline solution. The primary outcome was the degree of pain measured using the Numerical Rating Scale. The secondary outcomes were the degree and quality of neuropathic pain (Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory) and quality of life (36-Item Short-Form Health Survey). Follow-up was 6 months. Results: Thirty-five participants completed follow-up: 18 participants in the intervention group and 17 in the control group. The authors detected no statistically significant changes in average and maximum pain or neuropathic pain. Regarding quality of life, the control group reported a statistically significant improvement in emotional problem parameters, whereas the intervention group reported a deterioration. The authors observed no serious adverse effects. Conclusion:The authors did not find evidence to support that fat grafting is superior to a placebo when treating postmastectomy pain syndrome. (Plast.