Publications

PURPOSE: A recent TikTok trend of users reporting nasal size reduction after oral isotretinoin has conflated this acne medication as a nonsurgical rhinoplasty option, termed "Accutane rhinoplasty". We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting outcomes of rhinoplasty and oral isotretinoin and analyzed TikTok reels published under this emerging aesthetic trend.

METHODS: A comprehensive systematic literature search was conducted in December 2024 using the MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases following PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting outcomes of rhinoplasty patients treated with oral isotretinoin were included. TikTok Scraper extracted details of English-language TikTok reels posted up to September 2024 under three hashtags: #accutanenosejob, #accutanenose, and #accutanenosejobcheck.

RESULTS: Five articles met inclusion criteria. Studies included a median of 24 patients, with isotretinoin administered postoperatively in all studies and preoperatively in two studies. Two of three prospective studies reported positive findings, including lower frequency of facial acne, reduced facial skin thickness, and higher patient satisfaction. Retrospective studies reported mixed findings, including improved nasal skin appearance, increased rhinoplasty complications, and isotretinoin side effects. TikTok hashtags have 68.5 million views, and 100 reels were included for review. Self-reported physicians represented 10% (10/100) of reels and self-reported patients reporting nasal size reduction after isotretinoin represented 90% (90/100) of reels.

CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence on isotretinoin use in rhinoplasty patients is limited, with small sample sizes and mixed findings. While some studies suggest potential benefits in patients with thick nasal skin or severe acne, the long-term effects and safety profile remain unclear. The popularity of "Accutane rhinoplasty" on TikTok contrasts with the scarcity of rigorous clinical data, underscoring the need for further high-quality studies and greater clinician engagement in online discussions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: Therapeutic study. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

OBJECTIVE: An increasing number of women are choosing careers in the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS). These evolving surgeon demographics have highlighted the need for parental leave policies, lactation accommodations, and childcare services. Therefore, this study examines the reproductive and childbearing challenges that plastic and reconstructive surgeons encounter. Specific areas of focus include obstetric complications, parental leave, breastfeeding, childcare, and infertility.

METHODS: In September 2024, a scoping review was conducted across CINAHL, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Scopus, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Randomized control trials, observational studies, surveys, and interviews that examined pregnancy, parental leave, or family planning in PRS trainees or attendings were included. Abstracts, commentaries, editorials, systematic reviews, and non-English studies were excluded.

RESULTS: Seventeen studies, consisting primarily of surgeon experience surveys (82.35%, n = 3,145), were examined. Infertility affected 19.6%-50.7% of surgeons, with 9.8%-19.6% utilizing assisted reproductive technology. Female surgeons were older at their first live births than the general population and faced stigma related to pregnancy. Between 39% and 56% experienced obstetric complications. Many reported a lack of lactation spaces and greater childcare burdens. Following the institution of a policy protecting parental leave by the American Board of Plastic Surgery (ABPS), trainees reported a positive affirmation in their selection of the surgical specialty.

CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of protected parental leave has positively influenced workplace culture in PRS. However, significant gender-related challenges remain, particularly stigmas surrounding pregnancy and parental leave.

BACKGROUND: Gluteal augmentation with autologous fat grafting, colloquially referred to as Brazilian butt lift (BBL), is an increasingly common procedure with a highly reported complication profile.

OBJECTIVES: In this study we aimed to analyze the prevalence and characteristics of complications that accompanied these surgeries at ambulatory surgery facilities.

METHODS: Adults patients who experienced fat grafting complications from 2019 to 2021 were identified in QUAD A, formerly known as the American Association for Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgery Facilities (AAAASF, Highland Park, IL, USA), database. Patients and complications were analyzed based on sociodemographic, surgery-, and facility-specific variables with descriptive statistics and logistic regression.

RESULTS: Overall, 436 fat grafting procedures with complications were reported to QUAD A, with an overall complication rate of 0.94%. Of these complications, 164 (37.6%) were confirmed to be from gluteal augmentation procedures. Notably, the number of gluteal augmentation with fat grafting complications decreased from the year 2019 (48) to 2020 (36), then nearly doubled from 2020 to 2021 (69). The majority of patients were female (96.7%), with a mean age of 42.0 years and a mean BMI of 28.3 kg/m2. Wound infection was the most commonly documented complication (22.3%). Of the patients who experienced complications, 35.9% presented to a hospital for their complications and 12.6% required reoperation. Four deaths were described. There was no association between sociodemographic or surgical variables and increased odds of readmission or reoperation (P > .05), except for increasing surgeon number and reoperation (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS: Gluteal augmentation accounts for a large proportion of complications from fat grafting procedures. Increased reporting requirements may aid in future determination of incidences of complications and improve patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Recent CMS billing changes have raised concerns about insurance coverage for deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. This study compared the costs and utilization of transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM), DIEP, and latissimus dorsi (LD) flaps in breast reconstruction.

METHOD: The study utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to identify female patients who underwent DIEP, TRAM, and LD flap procedures from 2016 to 2019. Key data such as patient demographics, length of stay, complications, and costs (adjusted to 2021 USD) were analyzed, focusing on differences across the flap types.

RESULTS: A total of 17,770 weighted patient encounters were identified, with the median age being 51. The majority underwent DIEP flaps (73.5%), followed by TRAM (14.2%) and LD (12.1%) flaps. The findings revealed that DIEP and TRAM flaps had a similar length of stay (LOS), while LD flaps typically had a shorter LOS. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio were also comparable between DIEP and TRAM flaps, whereas LD flaps were significantly less expensive. Factors such as income quartile, primary payer of hospitalization, and geographic region significantly influenced flap choice.

CONCLUSION: The study's results appear to contradict the prevailing notion that TRAM flaps are more cost-effective than DIEP flaps. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio and hospital stays associated with TRAM and DIEP flaps were found to be similar. These findings suggest that changes in the insurance landscape, which may limit the use of DIEP flaps, could undermine patient autonomy while not necessarily reducing healthcare costs. Such policy shifts could favor less costly options like the LD flap, potentially altering the landscape of microvascular breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Patients consider many factors when selecting a plastic surgeon. Previous studies have demonstrated the importance of board certification and reputation in this decision. Despite this, there is a paucity of knowledge on the role that cost of procedure, social media, and surgeon training have on the decision-making process.

METHODS: The authors' study used a population-based survey administered by Amazon Mechanical Turk. Adults 18 years and older and residing in the United States were asked to rank the importance of 36 factors from 0 (least important) to 10 (most important) when selecting a plastic surgeon.

RESULTS: A total of 369 responses were analyzed. The mean age of respondents was 36.9 years (SD, 10.9 years), and 174 participants (47.2%) were female. Of those surveyed, 216 (55.0%) had previously undergone plastic surgery, and all respondents were considering plastic surgery either at the time of survey or in the future. The most common first step for respondents in identifying a plastic surgeon was a web-based search (32.2%). The top three most important factors in selecting a plastic surgeon were surgeon's experience with the desired procedure (7.48), surgeon's board certification (7.38), and surgeon's years in practice (7.36). The three least important factors were the surgeon's race (5.43), number of social media posts (5.62), and television appearances (5.64).

CONCLUSIONS: The authors' survey provides insight into the role that different elements play in the decision of selecting a plastic surgeon in the United States. Understanding how patients select a plastic surgeon can help surgeons optimize these elements in their practices.

BACKGROUND:  Use of pedicled flaps in vascular procedures is associated with decreased infection and wound breakdown. We evaluated the risk profile and postoperative complications associated with lower extremity open vascular procedures with and without pedicled flaps.

METHODS:  The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2010-2020) was queried for Current Procedural Terminology codes representing lower extremity open vascular procedures, including trunk and lower extremity pedicled flaps. Flap patients were compared with a randomized control group without flaps (1:3 cases to controls). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS:  We identified 132,934 adults who underwent lower extremity open vascular procedures. Concurrent pedicled flaps were rare (0.7%), and patients undergoing bypass procedures were more likely to receive a flap than nonbypass patients (69 vs. 64%, p < 0.0001). Flap patients had greater comorbidities. On univariate analysis, flap patients were more likely to experience wound (p = 0.0026), mild systemic (p < 0.0001), severe systemic (p = 0.0452), and all-cause complications (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for factors clinically suspected to be associated with increased risk (gender, body mass index, procedure type, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, functional status, diabetes, smoking, and albumin < 3.5 mg/dL), wound (p = 0.096) and severe systemic complications (p = 0.0719) were no longer significantly associated with flap patients.

CONCLUSION:  Lower extremity vascular procedures are associated with a high risk of complications. Use of pedicled flaps remains uncommon and more often performed in patients with greater comorbid disease. However, after risk adjustment, use of a pedicled flap in high-risk patients may be associated with lower than expected wound and severe systemic complications.

Background: Free tissue transfer is a valuable surgical option for the reconstruction of a myriad of complex lower extremity defects. Currently, there is a paucity of data that examines the risks of complications for each of these unique indications. Methods: Patients undergoing lower extremity free flap reconstruction from the ACS-NSQIP 2011-2019 database were stratified into groups based on the etiology and indication for reconstruction. Rates of major, surgical wound, and medical complications were compared over the first post-operative month. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify complication predictors. Results: 425 lower extremity free flaps were analyzed. The most common indications for lower extremity free flap reconstruction were wound-related (29%), malignancy (21%), and trauma (17%). Seventeen percent of free flaps had a major post-operative complication, 9% had a surgical wound complication, and 16% had a medical complication. There were no significant differences in major complications between the indications. However, the independent risk factors for major complications varied widely. Those with an indication of malignancy and those who received a musculocutaneous free flap were significantly more likely to have a surgical wound complication compared to the remaining cohort (p < 0.05). Those requiring free flap reconstruction for orthopedic hardware related concerns as well as those with wound related indications were significantly more likely to have a post-operative medical complication (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Understanding the unique risk profiles between the various indications and populations of patients undergoing lower extremity free flap reconstruction is critical for providing accurate risk estimations and optimizing post-operative outcomes and monitoring. Keywords microsurgery, lower extremity free flap, free flap reconstruction.