There is extensive coverage in the existing literature on implant-associated lymphomas like anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, but breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) has received limited scholarly attention since its first case in 1992. Thus, this study aims to conduct a qualitative synthesis focused on the underexplored association between breast implants and BIA-SCC. A systematic review was conducted utilizing the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify all currently reported cases of BIA-SCC. Additionally, a literature review was performed to identify potential biochemical mechanisms that could lead to BIA-SCC. Studies were vetted for quality using the NIH quality assessment tool. From an initial pool of 246 papers, 11 met the quality criteria for inclusion, examining a total of 14 patients aged between 40 and 81 years. BIA-SCC was found in a diverse range of implants, including those with smooth and textured surfaces, as well as those filled with saline and silicone. The condition notably manifested a proclivity for aggressive clinical progression, as evidenced by a mortality rate approximating 21.4% within a post-diagnostic interval of six months. Our literature review reveals that chronic inflammation, driven by various external factors such as pathogens and implants, can initiate carcinogenesis through epigenetic modifications and immune system alterations. This includes effects from exosomes and macrophage polarization, showcasing potential pathways for the pathogenesis of BIA-SCC. The study highlights the pressing need for further investigation into BIA-SCC, a subject hitherto inadequately addressed in the academic sphere. This necessitates the urgency for early screening and intervention to improve postoperative outcomes. While the review is confined by its reliance on case reports and series, it serves as a valuable reference for future research endeavors.
Publications by Type: Journal Article
2024
BACKGROUND: The drive to improve surgical proficiency through advanced simulation-based training has gained momentum. This meta-analysis systematically evaluated evidence regarding the impact of plastic surgery-related simulation on the performance of residents.
METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library and review of articles was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol. An inverse-variance random-effects model was used to combine study estimates to account for between-study variability. Objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) scores and subjective confidence scores were used to assess the impact of the simulation with positive changes from the baseline indicating better outcomes.
RESULTS: Eighteen studies pooling 367 trainees who participated in various simulations were included. Completion of simulation training was associated with significant improvement in subjective confidence scores with a mean increase of 1.44 units (95% CI: 0.93 to 1.94, P < 0.001), and in OSATS scores, with a mean increase of 1.24 units (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.62, P < 0.001), both on a 1-5 scale. Participants reported high satisfaction scores (mean = 4.76 units, 95% CI = 4.61 to 4.91, P = 0.006), also on a 1-5 scale.
CONCLUSIONS: Participation in surgical simulation markedly improved objective and subjective scoring metrics for surgical trainees. Several simulation devices are available for honing surgical skills, with the potential for advancements. The evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of simulations; thus, incorporating simulation into training curricula should be a priority in the field of plastic surgery.
UNLABELLED: In 1993, the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act mandated increasing minority and women enrollment in clinical trials (CTs). This study aimed to investigate trends in race and ethnicity enrollment and reporting in US plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) CT.
METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review was performed. All CTs in PRS from 2012 to 2022 were included. To assess racial and ethnic representation within CTs, a random-effects meta-analysis of proportion was conducted to pool the prevalence of the binomial data.
RESULTS: A total of 3609 studies were initially identified in the search strategy, with 154 later classified as CTs in PRS. Only 36 met the eligibility criteria for reporting race and ethnicity and were included in the analysis. A total of 7281 participants were included: 446 (6.1%) males and 6835 (93.9%) females. From CTs that correctly reported race, the pooled prevalence of races were as follows: Whites 78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 73-82%), Black or African Americans 8% (95% CI 5-11%), Asians 1% (95% CI <1-2%), American Indians <1% (95% CI <1-<1%), and Pacific Islanders <1% (95% CI <1-<1%). From the studies that reported ethnicity correctly, the pooled prevalence of Hispanics was 7% (95% CI 5-9%), and Non-Hispanics was 12% (<1-38%).
CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in minority representation were present among PRS CTs. This suggests clear limitations in generalizing PRS CT results to the population. Efforts to decrease the gap in minority enrollment and accurately report race and ethnicity are needed in all fields, including plastic surgery.
BACKGROUND: Recent literature has established outpatient breast reconstruction (BR) to be a safe alternative to inpatient BR. However, the impact of race and ethnicity on BR patient decision-making and postsurgical outcomes remains unexplored. This study aims to assess the impact of race and ethnicity on outpatient BR timing and postoperative complication rates.
METHODS: The 2013-2020 ACS-NSQIP database was utilized to identify women undergoing outpatient BR. Propensity score-matched analysis was conducted to generate balanced cohorts based on race and ethnicity. t-tests and Fisher's exact tests were used to assess group differences. Logistic regressions were modeled to evaluate differences in complications between groups.
RESULTS: A total of 63,526 patients underwent outpatient BR. After propensity score matching, 7664 patients and 3948 patients were included in the race and ethnicity-based analysis, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in the timing of BR patients received across cohorts. NW patients had lower rates of immediate BR (IBR) compared with White patients (47% vs. 53%, p < 0.001), and this also was seen in Hispanic patients (97% vs. 3%, p = 0.018). Subsequently, there were higher rates of delayed BR (DBR) in the NW cohort (55% vs. 45%, p < 0.001) and in the Hispanic cohort (95% vs. 5%, p = 0.018). There were no significant differences in the rates of 30-day postoperative complications across cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, our findings suggest that minority patients are more likely to undergo DBR than nonminority patients. However, there were no differences in 30-day postoperative outcomes across race or ethnicity. Future studies to elucidate patients' decision-making process in choosing optimal BR types and timing are necessary to better understand the impact of the observed differences in patient care.
BACKGROUND: As social attitudes toward plastic surgery continue to evolve, the prevalence of men seeking plastic surgery has been increasing. By delving into the factors that encourage male patients to seek plastic surgery and the obstacles they encounter, this study aims to facilitate the development of more inclusive and effective approaches for this population.
METHOD: An anonymous 41-question survey was conducted among adult men in the USA via the Amazon Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing platform. Questions assessed demographic information and identified factors that influenced males to seek plastic surgery care, the barriers they experienced while seeking care, and their preferences. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess relationships between demographic variables and likelihood of undergoing cosmetic surgery.
RESULTS: Four hundred and eleven complete responses were analyzed. The median (IQR) age of respondents was 32 (30, 40) years old. Of the respondents, 60% had undergone cosmetic surgery. Functional improvement (40%), personal aspiration (32%), and partners' opinions (22%) were the most commonly cited reasons for undergoing procedures. The most common barriers faced by this population were recovery time following a procedure (52%), perceived risk of complications (48%), cost (43%), fear of being identified as having had plastic surgery (32%), and surgeons not being able to meet expectations (31%). Eighty-nine percent of respondents who underwent plastic surgery procedures reported facing at least one barrier. Multivariate regression demonstrated that higher education levels were strongly associated with a likelihood of undergoing cosmetic surgery (p < 0.001). Income (p = 0.44) and region (p = 0.23) did not significantly affect the likelihood of undergoing plastic surgery.
CONCLUSION: Despite improving societal stigma, many male patients continue to face barriers when obtaining plastic surgery care. Efforts may be made to alleviate these barriers and surgeons looking to expand their practice may benefit from increased outreach to male patients. This may be compounded with improved education targeting stigma and risks of procedures, increasing male-specific marketing communications to make them feel welcome in an industry predominantly focused on female patients, and offering male-tailored procedures.
NO LEVEL ASSIGNED: 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 .
BACKGROUND: Empowerment is the process by which patients gain greater control of their health through active and informed decision-making. Greater patient empowerment has been shown to be positively correlated with improved health care outcomes and experiences. It is unclear how social media affect plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) patients' health care decision-making. This study aimed to help quantify how social media sites influence levels of PRS patient empowerment.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a modified Cyber Info-Decisional Empowerment Scale (CIDES) survey was distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) to US adults. Sociodemographic characteristics, PRS history, and social media usage data were collected. Wilcoxon signed-rank and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess for heterogeneity for categorical variables. ANOVA and t tests were used to evaluate differences in means for Likert scale-based responses.
RESULTS: A total of 473 survey responses were included. The participants were grouped based on their surgical history: cosmetic [187 (39.5%)], reconstructive [107 (22.6%)], both cosmetic and reconstructive [36 (7.6%)], or non-PRS [143 (30.2%)]. There was increased empowerment depending on the online resources used. Social media use was associated with significantly greater empowerment in six of seven CIDES categories. Of the social media platforms, Facebook was associated with higher empowerment in three of seven CIDES categories.
CONCLUSION: Social media use appears to have a positive impact on PRS patient empowerment, which may reflect better patient decision-making and autonomy when consulting with their plastic surgeon.
BACKGROUND: The Plastic Surgery Central Application (PSCA), designed to provide an equitable and streamlined application for both applicants and programs, was first designed in 2019, piloted in the 2020-21 application cycle, and is now in its fourth cycle in 2023-24. It has included preference signaling since the 2022-23 cycle, a feature in which applicants can send five "signals" to programs to express interest. We surveyed both program directors (PDs) and applicants following the 2023 match on their perceptions of PSCA versus Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS).
METHODS: Surveys were deployed to applicants from three integrated plastic surgery programs during the 2022-23 cycle and all PDs. Respondents were asked basic demographic information, which application system they preferred: PSCA or ERAS, how well they were able to highlight/evaluate different areas of the application, and about their experiences specifically with preference signaling.
RESULTS: Forty-two (48%) PDs and 93 (29%) applicants responded. Most PDs (72%) and applicants (59%) preferred PSCA, with only 18% and 27% preferring ERAS. The remainder had no preference. Ninety-three percent of applicants reported that the cost savings of the PSCA were important. Most applicants (78%) and PDs (80%) were in favor or strongly in favor of the preference signaling program.
CONCLUSIONS: Most applicants and PDs prefer PSCA over ERAS. These data, in conjunction with the cost savings, suggest that the PSCA may be a better alternative for the integrated plastic surgery match. Future analyses of these application systems will help provide the best application for prospective residents.
BACKGROUND: This study aims to pioneer in evaluating women's representation in plastic surgery innovations, focusing on mammary prosthesis devices' inventorship. Despite growing gender parity in the field, women's involvement in innovation remains underexplored. This is especially crucial, as the predominant recipients of these innovative technologies are women, urging a necessity for broader female engagement in pioneering surgical advancements.
METHOD: Patents under the "A61F2/12: Mammary prostheses and implants" classification between the dates January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2020, were identified using Google Patents Advanced. Inclusion criteria included patents (not designs) in English and applications (not grants), with no litigation limitations. Data collected included ID, title, assignee (categorized as industry, academic, private, individual), inventors, and dates (priority, filing, and publication). Sex of inventors was identified with the literature validated gender API, with manual resolution of unresolved genders or with ga_accuracy scores of less than 75%. Data were analyzed using 2-tailed Student t tests, χ2 analysis, and Pearson correlation coefficient (significance set at P ≤ 0.05).
RESULTS: Of the more than 130,000 plastic surgery patents in English identified between the 10-year period, 1355 were classified as A61F2/12. A total of 374 unique patents were included for analysis (841 duplicates were removed, and 140 patents were excluded because of non-English character author names). There was a significant increase in patents over the decade (from 15 in 2011 to 88 in 2020, R2 = 0.74, P < 0.05), with a decrease in number of inventors per patent (R2 = 0.12, P < 0.05). Of the 1102 total inventors, 138 were female (11.2%), with a 4-fold increase in representation over the decade (R2 = 0.58, P < 0.05), including increase in patents filed with a woman first inventor (0%-14.8%). Women were equally likely to be first 3 inventors versus middle to last inventors (12.8% vs 11.1%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Over a decade, mammary device innovations rose significantly. Although women inventors' representation improved, it remains disproportionate compared with women in residency/practice. Hence, interventions should aim to align inventor representation with training ratios, through institutional optimization, reducing gender segmentation, and enhancing funding opportunities.
BACKGROUND: The recent proposed alterations to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regulations, although subsequently reversed on August 21, 2023, have engendered persistent concerns regarding the impact of insurance policies on breast reconstruction procedures coverage. This study aimed to identify factors that would influence women's preferences regarding autologous breast reconstruction to better understand the possible consequences of these coverage changes.
METHODS: A survey of adult women in the United States was conducted via Amazon Mechanical Turk to assess patient preferences for breast reconstruction options, specifically deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap surgery. The Cochrane-Armitage test evaluated trends in flap preferences concerning incremental out-of-pocket payment increases.
RESULTS: Of 500 total responses, 485 were completed and correctly answered a verification question to ensure adequate attention to the survey, with respondents having a median (interquartile range) age of 26 (25-39) years. When presented with the advantages and disadvantages of DIEP versus TRAM flaps, 78% of respondents preferred DIEP; however, as DIEP's out-of-pocket price incrementally rose, more respondents favored the cheaper TRAM option, with $3804 being the "indifference point" where preferences for both procedures converged (P < 0.001). Notably, respondents with a personal history of breast reconstruction showed a higher preference for DIEP, even at a $10,000 out-of-pocket cost (P = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-pocket cost can significantly influence women's choices for breast reconstruction. These findings encourage a reevaluation of emergent insurance practices that could potentially increase out-of-pocket costs associated with DIEP flaps, to prevent cost from decreasing equitable patient access to most current reconstructive options.
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.