Background: Pediatric calvarial reconstruction is challenging because of the unique anatomical and growth considerations in this population. Comparative studies evaluating current cranioplasty materials are lacking. This review addresses the knowledge gap in pediatric cranioplasty outcomes with emphasis on current materials used. Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Outcome data comparing fresh bone, banked bone, titanium, poly(methyl methacrylate), and polyetheretherketone were abstracted. Results: Twenty studies met the authors’ selection criteria. The mean patient age ranged from 4 to 17.4 years. Autologous cranioplasty was performed in 439 patients, and 201 patients underwent alloplastic reconstruction. Fresh bone grafts and titanium mesh were associated with the lowest infection rates (0.4 percent and 3.3 percent, respectively; p < 0.001), graft failures (2.9 percent and 3.3 percent, respectively; p < 0.001), and surgical-site occurrence rates (8.8 percent and 6.7 percent, respectively; p < 0.001). Banked bone flaps had the highest overall complication rates (51 percent; p < 0.001), bone resorption (39.7 percent; p < 0.001), and failure rates (40.2 percent; p < 0.001), whereas polyetherether ketone had the highest rates of infection (16.1 percent; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Based on the available evidence to date, fresh bone grafts and titanium mesh demonstrated the lowest surgical-site infection, surgical-site occurrence, and graft failure rates. Banked bone flaps had the highest overall surgical-site complications and graft failures. Pediatric cranioplasty outcomes studies are needed to evaluate current and novel cranioplasty materials.
Background The Goldilocks mastectomy procedure involves local contouring of completely autologous breast tissue created by preserving and de‐epithelializing the residual mastectomy flaps. The purpose of this study was to provide outcomes data for 96‐Goldilocks mastectomy procedures analyzing indications, complications, relevant comorbidities, and adjuvant cancer treatment impacting reconstructive and aesthetic outcomes. Methods Comprehensive review of every patient who underwent Goldilocks mastectomy from 2012 to 2018 included relevant medical and surgical comorbidities, as well as complication profiles. Aesthetic outcomes were also assessed in those with postoperative imaging available. Results A total of 53 patients (96 breasts) were included in this study. Bilateral cases consisted of 81.1% of the total cohort (n = 86 cases), and 18.9% (n = 10 cases) were unilateral procedures. Mean age at the time of reconstruction was 55.8 (33‐77) years. Mean body mass index (BMI) at the time of reconstruction was 33.7 (19.2‐54.6). The overall complication rate was 9.38% (seroma = 2, hematoma = 1, cellulitis = 2, wound dehiscence = 3, and operating room take back = 1). Conclusions Goldilocks breast reconstruction is a safe, effective option in patients with higher than average BMI or excess local breast tissue, or in patients meeting these criteria preferring a single‐stage reconstruction. This study qualifies its use in patients with higher than average risk factors for more extensive reconstructive modalities.
Background The purpose of this study is to describe our experience and outcomes in oncoplastic pelvic reconstruction for patients who underwent either vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (VRAM) or omental flap following abdominoperineal resection (APR) at a single tertiary care institution. Methods All patients who underwent pelvic reconstruction following APR with either VRAM or omental flaps from January 1992 to January 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics and relevant comorbidities including chemotherapy and radiation therapy data were collected and analyzed. In addition, margin status at the time of oncologic resection was analyzed. Flap-specific data were collected for each approach. Oncologic data collected included cancer type, stage at time of APR, and rate of tumor recurrence within the flap. Results A total of 562 patients were identified who underwent pelvic reconstruction with either VRAM or omental pedicle flaps. Of these, 274 (48.8%) underwent VRAM reconstruction and 288 (51.2%) underwent omental flap reconstruction. All margins were negative at time of cancer ablation surgery. Complications data included: seroma (VRAM = 2 [0.36%]; omentum = 32 [5.69%], p < 0.0001), wound dehiscence (VRAM = 31 [5.52%]; omentum = 17 [3.02%], p = 0.022), abscess (VRAM = 4 [0.71%]; omentum = 27 [4.8%], p < 0.0001), cellulitis (VRAM = 2 [0.36%]; omentum = 10 [1.78%], p = 0.025). Statistical comparison of tumor recurrence between these two reconstructive approaches showed a significantly higher recurrence rate in omental flaps compared with VRAM flaps (p = 0.000127). Conclusion The results of this study suggest a significantly higher tumor recurrence rate in omental flap pelvic reconstruction compared with VRAM flaps. This knowledge has the potential to influence surgical planning and flap selection in pelvic reconstruction.
Background Artificial Intelligent Virtual Assistants (AIVA) is a segment of artificial intelligence that is rapidly developing. However, its utilization to address patients' frequently asked questions remains unexplored. Methods We developed an AIVA to answer questions related to 10 frequent topics asked by plastic surgery patients in our institution. Between July 27, 2018, and August 10 of 2018, we recruited subjects with administrative positions at our health care institution to chat with the virtual assistant. They asked, with their own words, 1 question for each topic and filled out a satisfaction questionnaire. Postsurvey analysis of questions and answers allowed assessment of the virtual assistant's accuracy. Results Thirty participants completed the survey. The majority was female (70%), and the mean age was 27.76 years (SD, 8.68 [19–51] years). The overall accuracy of the plastic surgery AIVA was 92.3% (277/294 questions), and participants considered the answer correct in 83.3% of the time (250/294 answers). Most of the participants considered the AIVA easy to use, answered adequately, and could be helpful for patients. However, when asked if this technology could replace a human assistant, they stayed neutral.
Although periorbital edema and ecchymosis are commonly encountered after facial plastic and reconstructive surgery procedures, there is currently no validated grading scale to qualify these findings. In this study, the modified "Surgeon Periorbital Rating of Edema and Ecchymosis (SPREE)" questionnaire is used as a grading scale for patients undergoing facial plastic surgery procedures. This article aims to validate a uniform grading scale for periorbital edema and ecchymosis using the modified SPREE questionnaire in the postoperative period. This is a prospective study including 82 patients at two different routine postoperative visits (second and seventh postoperative days), wherein the staff and resident physicians, physician assistants (PAs), patients, and any accompanying adults were asked to use the modified SPREE questionnaire to score edema and ecchymosis of each eye of the patient who had undergone a plastic surgery procedure. Interrater and intrarater agreements were then examined. Cohen's kappa coefficient was calculated to measure intrarater and interrater agreement between health care professionals (staff physicians and resident physicians); staff physicians and PAs; and staff physicians, patients, and accompanying adults. Good to excellent agreement was identified between staff physicians and resident physicians as well as between staff physicians and PAs. There was, however, poor agreement between staff physicians, patients, and accompanying adults. In addition, excellent agreement was found for intraobserver reliability during same-day visits. The modified SPREE questionnaire is a validated grading system for use by health care professionals to reliably rate periorbital edema and ecchymosis in the postoperative period. Validation of the modified SPREE questionnaire may improve ubiquity in medical literature reporting and related outcomes reporting in future.
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
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.