Immediate breast reconstruction has important advantages over delayed reconstruction, including a shorter operative time and decreased psychological distress for the patient. However, the authors' experiences with the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap demonstrate variable aesthetic outcomes among patients who undergo radiation postoperatively. To establish an association between radiation and poor postoperative results, a matched-pairs analysis was conducted. Thirty irradiated patients were paired with 30 nonirradiated patients, according to age and body mass index. For each group, the incidence of fat necrosis, fibrosis/shrinkage, and flap contracture was recorded. In addition, an aesthetic evaluation was conducted to compare before-and-after images of 10 irradiated patients with those of 10 nonirradiated patients from similar time periods. The images were randomized and blindly evaluated by a panel of eight judges. A five-point scale was used to evaluate symmetry, aesthetic proportion, and the appearance of the superior pole. Statistical analysis demonstrated a significant difference in the score changes for irradiated and nonirradiated patients, according to all three criteria. Nonirradiated patient scores increased by one-half point, and irradiated patient scores decreased by one-half point. In addition, the incidences of fat necrosis, fibrosis, and flap contracture were all significantly higher among the irradiated group. These results suggest that when possible, reconstruction should be delayed until after radiation therapy is complete. Persons who smoke or are obese may be at particular risk for complications following radiation therapy.

No abstract

LLLT may be a promising treatment option for patients who do not respond to either finasteride or minoxidil, and who do not want to undergo hair transplantation. This technology appears to work better for some people than for others. Factors predicting who will most benefit are yet to be determined. Larger, longer-term placebo-controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings, and demonstrate statistical significance, or refute them altogether.

No abstract

A variety of materials have been used to reconstruct defects of the orbital floor. Autogenous materials such as bone and cartilage have the obvious drawback of the necessary donor site, whereas alloplastic implants carry the potential risk of infection, particularly when in communication with the maxillary sinus. Consequently, there has been interest in the use of resorbable alloplastic material that acts as a barrier until completely degraded. In this series, a total of 12 patients with orbital defects larger than 1 cm2 were treated by the placement of a resorbable mesh plate of polyglycolic and polylactic acid (Lactosorb). Of the total of 12 patients treated, 3 were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 9 patients, the mean follow-up was 6 months, with the longest follow-up being 15 months and the shortest 1 month. Two patients developed enophthalmos. In each case, this measured 2 mm using Hertel exophthalmometry, and was present in the early postoperative period (less than 1 month). The cause of the enophthalmos in both patients was found to be a technical error in placement of the mesh. One patient developed an inflammatory reaction along the infraorbital rim requiring implant removal. This occurred at 7 months. From the above series, it is concluded that resorbable mesh is an acceptable material for reconstruction of the orbital floor in selected patients. It is believed that larger floor defects are better suited for nonresorbable alloplastic reconstruction, and that placement of the mesh over the infraorbital rim is unnecessary and places the patient at risk for a local inflammatory reaction.