Background: Publication in peer-reviewed journals is a duty and privilege. It is essential to the advancement of evidence-based medicine and often used as a proxy for academic achievement, contributing to decisions around promotion in academia. Within plastic surgery, authors have historically been male surgeons affiliated with academic institutions, lacking representation of women, private practice, medical students, and international collaboration. This study analyzes differences in authors' gender, practice affiliation, degree of education, and international collaboration in articles published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, which was chosen as the representative journal given its high impact factor (3.946) and consistent ranking as the number one journal in plastic surgery worldwide. Methods: A list of Breast, Cosmetic, and Hand/Peripheral Nerve articles published between 2006 and 2019 was compiled from the online archive of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Demographic author characteristics were recorded, and statistical analyses were performed to identify trends over time. Results: A total of 2688 articles were analyzed. The proportion of articles written by female authors in the Breast category, authors in private practice with academic affiliation in the Cosmetic section, and U.S. collaboration with other countries increased over time (p = 0.038, p = 0.029, p < 0.001, respectively). First authors with bachelor's, master's, and doctorate degrees have also been contributing increasingly. Conclusions: This analysis revealed increasing demographic heterogeneity of authors in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery over time, with increasing contributions from women, surgeons in private practice with academic affiliation, medical students, and international collaborations. The Journal is capturing contributions from an increasingly diverse authorship, consistent with the changing demographics of plastic surgeons.
Background In selecting breast implants for breast reconstruction, current preoperative planning largely relies on 2-dimensional measurements, which are often limited in suboptimal accuracy and objectivity. Although the introduction of 3-dimensional imaging modalities has further improved preoperative planning, they require in-depth analysis of accuracy if they are to be considered as a standardized part of preoperative planning. Thus, the present study analyzes the reliability of the Vectra 3D Imaging System in predicting breast mass and explores potential confounding variables that may limit its accuracy. Methods A retrospective review of 202 breasts that received direct-to-implant reconstruction by a single surgeon between February 2015 and February 2019 was conducted. Variables recorded included Vectra predicted mass (VPM; in grams), mastectomy mass (MM; in grams), ptosis grade, and body mass index (BMI). Body mass index was classified as follows: underweight (BMI < 20 kg/m2), normal (20 kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 25 kg/m2), overweight (25 kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 30 kg/m2), and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). Cup size was approximated as follows: A and smaller (MM ≤250 g), B (250 g < MM ≤ 450 g), C (450 g < MM ≤ 600 g), and D and larger (MM ≥ 600 g). Correlation between MM and VPM was evaluated using 2-tailed Pearson correlation coefficients (r), and associated formula was derived from a linear model. Equality of variances was assessed with the Bartlett test. Correlation coefficients calculated for ptosis and BMI categories were then compared with the overall correlation coefficient. Significance was set at α = 0.05, and analyses were conducted in R 3.6.0, version 1.70. Results There was a strong correlation between MM and VPM (R = 0.90, P < 0.0001). The following equation was derived to predict MM: [MM] = 0.8 × [VPM] + 32 (adjusted r 2 = 0.81). The Bartlett test indicated that VPM varies significantly across cup sizes (P < 0.0001). Comparison of correlation coefficients for ptosis and BMI categories revealed a significantly reduced correlation coefficient for pseudoptosis (0.90 vs 0.75, P = 0.0425). Conclusions The present study suggests that the reliability of Vectra in predicting breast mass varies across cup sizes and that there exists a significantly decreased association between VPM and MM among pseudoptotic breasts. These are important considerations when using this technology in surgical planning.
Introduction: While surgical interventions for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) ankylosis are well-documented, there is lack of consensus regarding the ideal approach in pediatric patients. Surgical interventions include gap arthroplasty, interpositional arthroplasty, or total joint reconstruction. Methods: A systematic review of PubMed (Jan 1, 1990–Jan 1, 2017) and Scopus (Jan 1, 1990–Jan 1, 2017) was performed and included studies in English with at least one patient under the age of 18 diagnosed with TMJ ankylosis who underwent surgical correction. Primary outcomes of interest included surgical modality, preoperative maximum interincisal opening (MIO) (MIOpreop), postoperative MIO (MIOpostop), ΔMIO (ΔMIO = MIOpostop – MIOpreop), and complications. Results: Twenty-four case series/reports with 176 patients and 227 joints were included. By independent sample t tests MIOpostop (mm) was greater for gap arthroplasty (30.18) compared to reconstruction (27.47) (t = 4.9, P = 0.043), interpositional arthroplasty (32.87) compared to reconstruction (t = 3.25, P = 0.002), but not for gap compared to interpositional (t = −1.9, P = 0.054). ΔMIO (mm) was greater for gap arthroplasty (28.67) compared to reconstruction (22.24) (t = 4.2, P = 0.001), interpositional arthroplasty (28.33) compared to reconstruction (t = 3.27, P = 0.002), but not for interpositional compared to gap (t = 0.29, P = 0.33). Weighted-average follow-up time was 28.37 months (N = 164). 4 of 176 (2.27%) patients reported development of re-ankylosis. There was no significant difference in occurrence of re-ankylosis between interventions. Conclusions: Given the technical ease of gap arthroplasty and nonsignificant differences in ΔMIO, MIOpostop, or occurrence of re-ankylosis between gap and interpositional arthroplasty, gap arthroplasty should be considered for primary ankylosis repair in pediatric patients, with emphasis on postoperative physiotherapy to prevent recurrent-ankylosis.
Background Microsurgical free tissue transfer (FTT) is a widely employed surgical modality utilized for reconstruction of a broad range of defects, including head and neck, extremity, and breast. Flap survival is reported to be 90%–95%. When FTT fails, salvage procedures aim at establishing reperfusion while limiting ischemia time—with salvage rates between 22% and 67%. There are limited data‐driven predictors of successful salvage present in the literature. This systematic review aims to identify predictors of flap salvage. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted per PRISMA guidelines. Articles included in the final analysis were limited to those investigating FTT salvage procedures and included factors impacting outcomes. Cohort and case series (>5 flaps) studies up until March 2021 were included. Chi‐square tests and linear regression modeling was completed for analysis. Results The patient‐specific factors significantly associated with salvage included the absence of hypercoagulability (p < .00001) and no previous salvage attempts (p < .00001). Case‐specific factors significantly associated with salvage included trunk/breast flaps (p < .00001), fasciocutaneous/osteocutaneous flaps (p = .006), venous compromise (p < .00001), and shorter time from index procedure to salvage attempt (R = .746). Radiation in the head and neck population was significantly associated with flap salvage failure. Conclusions Given the complexity and challenges surrounding free flap salvage procedures, the goal of this manuscript was to present data helping guide surgical decision‐making. Based on our findings, patients without documented hypercoagulability, no previous salvage attempts, fasciocutaneous/osteocutaneous flaps, trunk/breast flaps, and a shorter time interval post‐index operation are the best candidates for a salvage attempt.
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.