Background The superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flap allows transfer of tissue without violating the rectus fascia. Traditionally it is best used in single stage reconstruction when vessel caliber is 1.5 mm; 56% to 70% of SIEAs are less than 1.5 mm and, therefore, not reliable. We aim to demonstrate the increased reliability of SIEA through surgical delay by quantifying reconstructive outcomes and delay-induced hemodynamic alterations. Methods Patients presenting for autologous breast reconstruction between May 2019 and October 2020 were evaluated with preoperative imaging and received either delayed SIEA or delayed deep inferior epigastric (DIEP) reconstruction based on clinical considerations, such as prior surgery and perforator size/location. Prospective data were collected on operative time, length of stay, and complications. Arterial diameter and peak flow were quantified with Doppler ultrasound predelay and postdelay. Results Seventeen delayed SIEA flaps were included. The mean age (± SD) was 46.2 ± 10.55 years, and body mass index was 26.7 ± 4.26 kg/m2. Average hospital stay after delay was 0.85 ± 0.90 days, and duration before reconstruction was 6 days to 14.5 months. Delay complications included 1 abdominal seroma (n = 1, 7.7%). Superficial inferior epigastric artery diameter predelay (mean ± 95% confidence interval) was 1.37 ± 0.20 mm and increased to 2.26 ± 0.24 mm postdelay. A significant increase in diameter was noted 0.9 ± 0.22 mm (P < 0.0001). Mean peak flow predelay was 14.43 ± 13.38 cm/s and 44.61 ± 60.35 cm/s (n = 4, P = 0.1822) postdelay. Conclusions Surgical delay of the SIEA flap augments SIEA diameter, increasing the reliability of this flap for breast reconstruction. Superficial inferior epigastric artery delay results in low rates of complications and no failures in our series. Although more patients are needed to assess increase in arterial flow, use of surgical delay can expand the use of SIEA flap reconstruction and reduce abdominal morbidity associated with abdominal flap breast reconstruction.
Introduction Firearm morbidity and mortality have been increasing in recent years, and with this, the demand for medical personnel firearm injury treatment knowledge. Extremities contribute to a majority of firearm injuries, with these injuries being particularly complex because of neurovascular proximity within a confined space. Knowledge of firearm mechanism of injury and treatment management options is important for any trauma hand surgeon. Many factors play vital roles in the treatment of complex upper extremity (UE) gunshot wounds (GSWs). The aim of our review and case illustrations is to provide hand surgeons with an up-to-date guide for initial emergent management, soft tissue, bony, and nerve repair and reconstruction. Patient and Methods A literature review was conducted in the current management of UE GSW injuries, and 2 specific patient case examples were included. High-energy versus low-energy GSWs were documented and compared, as well as containment injures. Management including soft tissue, bony, and nerve injuries was explored along with patient outcome. Based on these findings, guidelines for GSW management were purposed. Conclusion Gunshot wounds of the UE encompass a group of highly heterogeneous injuries. High-energy wounds are more extensive, and concomitant injuries to bone, vessel, nerve, muscle, and soft tissue are common. Early treatment with adequate debridement, skeletal fixation, and soft tissue coverage is indicated for complex injuries, and antibiotic treatment in the pre-, peri-, and postoperative period is indicated for operative injuries. Soft tissue coverage options include the entire reconstructive ladder, with pattern of injury and considerations of wound characteristics dictating reconstructive choice. There are arguments to using either external or internal bony fixation techniques for bone fracture management, with choice tailored to the patient. For management of nerve injuries, we advocate earlier nerve repair and a shorter duration of observation before secondary reconstruction in selective cases. If transected nerve endings cannot be brought together, nerve autografts of shorter length are recommended to bridge nerve ending gaps. A significant number of patients with GSW fail to make necessary follow-up appointments, which adds to challenges in treatment.
Background: Socioeconomic disparities remain prevalent among those who undergo breast reconstruction. At our institution, patients must meet certain criteria to become eligible for breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of socioeconomic factors on breast reconstruction eligibility, enrollment, choice, and completion at our large safety-net institution. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent partial or total mastectomy at a large safety-net hospital from 2016 to 2019 was completed. Surgical and demographic data were compared across varying socioeconomic factors. Results: A total of 645 patients were included in the study. More patients of a racial minority had government-based insurance than White patients (89% versus 81%; P = 0.01). Those with government-based insurance had higher average hemoglobin A1c values (6.26 versus 6.0; P = 0.03), proportion of American Society of Anesthesiologists scores greater than III (46% versus 40%; P = 0.01), and smokers (23% versus 9%; P = 0.02) than those with private insurance. Diabetic patients, patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists greater than III, and active smokers were significantly less likely to receive a plastic surgery consult. Patients with government-based insurance underwent immediate tissue expander placement at mastectomy at rates lower than those with private insurance (57% versus 69%; P = 0.01). Conclusions: Barriers remain for socioeconomically disadvantaged patients to be eligible for, undergo, and complete breast reconstruction. Obesity, diabetes, smoking, and poor overall health were identified as the main barriers and were associated with racial minorities, government-based insurance, and lower incomes. Concerted effort through multidisciplinary teams is needed to maximize eligibility of socioeconomically disadvantaged breast cancer patients for reconstruction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.