Thirty-five unique papers discussed utilizing AV loops in a single- or two-stage approach, yielding 260 and 98 single- and two-stage AV loops, respectively. There was a statistically significant higher rate of major complications in two-stage as compared to single-stage AV loops. There was a non-statistically significant difference in rate of minor complications in the single-stage as compared to two-stage AV loops. Overall, there was a statistically significant higher success rate in the single-stage as compared to two-stage AV loops CONCLUSION: There was a statistically significant higher rate of major complications and failures in two-stage AV loops. As well-conducted randomized controlled studies are nearly impossible to perform in this population, the decision to pursue a single- versus two-stage reconstruction should ultimately be determined based on individual patient co-morbidities, the size and etiology of defect, and the type of free tissue transfer planned.

No abstract

Background: Management of cranial osteomyelitis is challenging and often includes débridement of infected bone and delayed alloplastic cranioplasty. However, the optimal interval between the removal of infected bone and definitive reconstruction remains controversial. The authors investigated the optimal time for definitive reconstruction and factors influencing cranioplasty reinfection. Methods: A retrospective review of 111 alloplastic cranioplasties for osteomyelitis between 2002 and 2015 was performed. Patients were divided into four subgroups based on timing of reconstruction: group 1, less than 3 months; group 2, 3 to 6 months; group 3, 6 to 12 months; and group 4, more than 12 months. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate the probability of cranioplasty reinfection based on risk factors. Median follow-up was 45.9 months (range, 12.4 to 136.9 months). Results: The combined reinfection rate was 23.4 percent. The reinfection rate in group 1 was 39.6 percent; group 2, 12.5 percent; group 3, 8.0 percent; and group 4, 0.0 percent (p < 0.001). The mean interval between the infected bone removal and cranioplasty was shorter in patients with reinfection than in patients without reinfection (2.2 ± 3.9 months versus 6.1 ± 8.3 months; p < 0.001). The strongest independent predictors of reinfection were chemotherapy (OR, 10.1; 95 percent CI, 2.9 to 35.2), composite defect requiring scalp reconstruction at the time of cranioplasty (OR, 3.3; 95 percent CI, 1.2 to 8.9), and early reconstruction. Each month of delay in reconstruction reduced the reinfection rate by 10 percent (OR, 0.9 per each month of delay; 95 percent CI, 0.8 to 1.0). Cranioplasty material was not significant. Conclusions: Early alloplastic cranioplasty following osteomyelitis carries an unacceptably high risk of reinfection. This risk decreases by 10 percent with each month of delay. The authors’ regression model can be used to predict the probability of reinfection for all time periods. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Increased FA values in WM areas of the AOMS compared with the POMS patients suggest that diffuse WM microstructure changes are more attributable to age of onset than a simple function of disease duration and age.

Background: Despite advances in skin envelope reduction techniques and experienced nipple-sparing mastectomy flap procedures, the rate of nipple malposition and secondary revision in these patients remains high and eligible candidates are limited. In this article, the authors present a novel technique combining skin reduction nipple-sparing mastectomy surgery with single-stage skin-only mastopexy and direct-to-implant reconstruction. Methods: A retrospective review was performed at a single institution from 2015 to 2018. All patients were operated on using this technique consecutively, by a breast and plastic surgeon team (A.F. and A.M.). Surgical technique and outcomes were compared with the currently accepted literature. Results: Twenty-six patients (40 breasts) underwent this technique; all were single-stage direct-to-implant reconstructions. The average body mass index was 31 kg/m2. A Wise pattern was used in 35 breasts (87.5 percent) and prepectoral placement was used in 25 breasts (62.5 percent). Overall complications included seroma [n = 6 (15 percent)], vertical/T-junction dehiscence [n = 4 (10 percent)], skin necrosis [n = 4 (10 percent)], superficial or partial nipple necrosis [n = 4 (10 percent)], with no total nipple-areola complex lost and no reconstructive failures at 18.7 months’ average follow-up. Conclusions: In this article, the authors share a novel reconstructive technique in which the skin envelope is reduced, the nipple-areola complex is repositioned, and a direct-to-implant reconstruction is performed in a single stage at the time of mastectomy. Consideration of pearls and pitfalls accompanies a review of the authors’ experienced complication profile, and is discussed in the context of current literature. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.