Introduction: Tissue rearrangement after an oncoplastic breast reduction may complicate identification of margins during reexcision. Little is known about outcomes of reoperation in this setting. Methods: This is a single-institution, retrospective analysis of outcomes of margin reexcisions after lumpectomy with concurrent oncoplastic Wise-pattern reduction from 2015 to 2020. Outcomes assessed were the rate of successful breast conservation, in-breast recurrence, wound issues or complications, effect on cosmesis, and delay to onset of adjuvant therapy. Results: From 2015 to 2020, 649 patients underwent lumpectomy with oncoplastic Wise-pattern reduction. Forty-seven patients (7.2%) had greater than or equal to one positive margin(s); of these, 28 went directly to mastectomy, and 19 underwent margin reexcision. Residual disease was found in seven of 19 patients (37%) at reexcision. The rate of successful breast-conserving therapy was 95% with a mean follow-up of 31 months. There was one (5%) in-breast recurrence (invasive ductal carcinoma [IDC] occurring 30 months after the original operation); this patient had a mastectomy for treatment of her recurrence. The overall complication rate was 37%. Radiation was administered to 18 patients (95%), and two patients (11%) had delay of radiation past 6 weeks due to wound complications. Of the 14 patients with photographs available, 12 of 14 patients (86%) were blindly assessed to have equivalent or better cosmesis after margin reexcision (versus initial lumpectomy). Conclusion: Margin reexcision after oncoplastic breast reduction with Wise-pattern is feasible and effective, and can be done without compromising the initial cosmetic results.

About 5%-11% of all abdominal surgery results in incisional hernia. This rate can be even higher among highrisk populations such as transplant patients. Lifetime incidence of incisional hernia following liver transplant is as high as 43% in recent studies. The transplant population is at higher risk for incisional hernia precisely because of their immunosuppressive therapy. Thus, it is imperative to understand the risk factors for incisional hernia in this unique patient population. This article focuses on understanding preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative risk factors for failure of hernia repair in the transplant population in addition to discussing risk stratification for incisional hernia in this population. Furthermore, we discuss the utility of panniculectomy in abdominal organ transplantation. Additionally, we discuss the value of mesh placement in abdominal wall closure. Finally, we review the concept of vascularized composite allograft as a method for achieving abdominal wall closure for patients who have failed more traditional repairs and who are left with inadequate tissue for successful repair.

Background: For patients with large and/or ptotic breasts, a planned staged approach to nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been described. Less is known about surgical outcomes of unplanned staged NSM for management of positive margins after partial mastectomy with oncoplastic reduction. It is not clear from earlier studies whether an interval of less than 10 weeks between oncoplastic reduction and NSM is feasible, when a shorter interval is important for oncologic reasons. Methods: This is a single institution analysis of patients from 2018 to 2021 with a diagnosis of invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ who underwent NSM after oncoplastic breast reduction for positive margins or nodes. The primary endpoint measured was nipple loss. Secondary outcomes were need for operative re-intervention and wound complications. Results: Nine patients (14 breasts) underwent partial mastectomy with oncoplastic Wise-pattern breast reduction, followed by NSM. Three patients underwent intersurgery chemotherapy. The average interval between oncoplastic reduction and NSM was 11.3 weeks when excluding patients undergoing chemotherapy (range 8-13 weeks). Thirteen breasts (93%) underwent pre-pectoral direct-to-implant reconstruction. One breast (7%) received autologous reconstruction. One breast required reoperation for seroma. The rate of partial or total nipple loss was 0%, with an average follow-up of 1.6 years. Conclusions: Our experience demonstrates excellent outcomes from NSM after oncoplastic breast reduction, with the majority of patients undergoing single-stage pectoral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Overall, patients had a shorter intersurgery interval, compared with prior studies, with no cases of nipple loss. An intersurgery interval of 8 weeks may be feasible when avoiding delays is important for oncologic reasons.

No abstract

An oncoplastic breast reduction may disrupt normal lymphatic drainage and make subsequent identification of the sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) unreliable. There are little data on the success rate of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after recent oncoplastic breast reduction, and there is no agreement on whether SLNB should be done at the time of the partial mastectomy and reduction for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The primary goals of this study were to evaluate the identification rate of SLNB after recent oncoplastic or functional breast reduction and to examine recurrence rates in this setting. Results reveal SLNB is feasible in this setting. At least one SLN was found in all patients, and there were no recurrences with an average follow-up of 34 months.