Search

Background: Reduction mammoplasty is popular among people of various age groups, yet the impact of age on postoperative outcomes remains debated., Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2008-2021) was queried to identify adult female patients who underwent reduction mammoplasty. Patients were categorized into 10-year age brackets (i.e., 18-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, and >70 years). We compared age-dependent 30-day outcomes via confounder-adjusted multivariate analyses., Results: 40,958 female patients (mean age: 41 ± 14 years and mean body mass index: 31 ± 6.1 kg/m²) were identified. Complications occurred in 6.4% (n = 2635) of cases, with 770 (1.9%) and 483 (1.2%) patients requiring reoperation and readmission, respectively. 1706 (4.2%) women experienced surgical complications, whereas medical complications were generally rare (n = 289; 0.7%). Compared with women aged 18-29 years, risks of any, surgical, and medical complications were higher for patients aged 30-39 years (OR: 1.22, p < 0.01; OR: 1.05, p = 0.51; OR: 1.84, p < 0.01), 40-49 years (OR: 1.34, p < 0.01; OR: 1.17, p = 0.04; OR: 1.54, p = 0.03), 50-59 years (OR: 1.45, p < 0.01; OR: 1.31, p < 0.01; OR: 1.78, p < 0.01), 60-69 years (OR: 1.38 years, p < 0.01; OR: 1.29, p = 0.01; OR: 1.71, p < 0.01), and >70 years (OR: 1.25, p = 0.18; OR: 1.01, p = 0.98; OR: 1.86, p = 0.14). Patients aged >30 years were also more likely to require readmissions and reoperations., Conclusion: Patient age significantly affects outcomes after reduction mammoplasty, with the lowest risk in patients aged <30 years. Importantly, the association between age and postoperative morbidity was not linear. These findings can help guide informed decisions, recognizing that while age is a factor, it is not the sole determinant of risk., (Copyright © 2024 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Breast augmentation ranks among the most popular plastic surgery procedures. Yet, reports on post-operative patient-reported quality of life (QoL) and satisfaction remain conflicting., Methods: A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Three databases were searched for eligible studies that reported pre-and/or post-operative Breast-Q™ augmentation scores for patient QoL (psychosocial, sexual, and physical well-being) and/or satisfaction., Results: A total of 39 studies (53 patient cohorts and 18,322 patients) were included in the quantitative synthesis. The pairwise meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in patient-reported psychosocial (MD: +38.10) and sexual well-being (MD: +40.20) as well as satisfaction with breast (MD: +47.88) (all p < 0.00001). Physical well-being improved slightly after breast augmentation (MD: +6.97; p = 0.42). The single-arm meta-analysis yielded comparable results, with Breast-Q™ scores in psychosocial and sexual well-being as well as satisfaction with breast increasing from 37.2, 31.1, and 26.3 to 75.0, 70.6, and 72.7, respectively (all p < 0.00001). Physical well-being improved by 8.1 (75.8 pre-operatively to 83.9 post-operatively; p = 0.17). Subgroup analyses highlighted higher QoL and satisfaction following breast augmentation for purely esthetic purposes and alloplastic mammaplasty. Although patient-reported physical and sexual well-being increased in the long term, psychosocial well-being was the highest in the short term., Conclusion: Patient satisfaction with breast, psychosocial, and sexual well-being increased significantly after breast augmentation. In contrast, patient-reported physical well-being yielded ambivalent results, varying by mammaplasty technique and post-operative follow-up time. Plastic surgeons should be sensitized about our findings to refine eligibility criteria and gain a deeper understanding of the patients' perceived surgical experience., Prospero Trial Registration No: CRD42023409605., (Copyright © 2024 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The increasing demand for gender-affirming surgery (GAS) in transgender and gender-diverse healthcare highlights the importance of breast augmentation surgery (BAS) for transfeminine patients. Despite its significance, there is a lack of research on postoperative outcomes of BAS., Methods: We analyzed the multi-institutional American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) (2008-2021) database to identify female transgender individuals (TGIs) who underwent BAS surgery, both isolated and combined with concurrent GAS procedures. We evaluated 30-day outcomes, including the incidence of mortality, reoperation, readmission as well as surgical and medical complication occurrence., Results: Of 1699 female TGIs, 92% underwent isolated BAS and 7.7% underwent combined BAS. The mean age and body mass index (BMI) were 36 ± 12 years and 27 ± 6.6 kg/m 2 , respectively. Isolated BAS showed a 2.8% complication rate, while combined BAS had a higher rate with 9.1%. Specifically, all complications occurred in patients undergoing BAS with concurrent genitourinary surgery (n = 85; 14%), whereas no adverse events were recorded after combined BAS and facial feminization (n = 19) or chondrolaryngoplasty (n = 19). In patients seeking combined BAS, advanced age (p = 0.05) and nicotine abuse (p = 0.004) were identified as risk factors predisposing to adverse events, whereas American Society of Anesthesiology class 1 was found to be protective (p = 0.02)., Conclusions: Isolated BAS in TGIs demonstrates a positive safety profile. Combined surgeries, particularly with genitourinary procedures, pose higher risks. Identifying risk factors such as smoking and advanced age is crucial for patient selection and surgical planning. These findings can aid in refining patient eligibility and inform surgical decision-making for BAS., (Copyright © 2024 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A variety of breast reconstruction (BR) options are available. The significance of timing on outcomes remains debated. This study aims to compare complications in breast cancer patients undergoing implant-based and autologous BR immediately after mastectomy or at a delayed time point., Methods: We reviewed the ACS-NSQIP database (2008-2021) to identify all female patients who underwent BR for oncological purposes. Outcomes were stratified by technique (implant-based versus autologous) and timing (immediate versus delayed), and included 30-day mortality, reoperation, (unplanned) readmission, and surgical and medical complications., Results: A total of 21,560 patients were included: 11,237 (52%) implant-based (9791/87% immediate, 1446/13% delayed) and 10,323 (48%) autologous (8378/81% immediate, 1945/19% delayed). Complications occurred in 3666 (17%) patients (implant-based: n = 1112/11% immediate, n = 64/4.4% delayed cohorts; Autologous: n = 2073/25% immediate, n = 417/21% delayed cohorts). In propensity score weighting (PSW) analyses, immediate BR was associated with significantly more complications than delayed BR (p < 0.0001). This was the case for both implant-based and autologous BR, with a greater difference between the two time points noted in implant-based. Confounder-adjusted multivariable analyses confirmed these results., Conclusion: At the 30-day time point, delayed BR is associated with significantly lower complication rates than immediate BR, in both the implant-based and autologous cohorts. These findings are not a blanket recommendation in favor of immediate and/or delayed BR. Instead, our insights may guide surgeons and patients in decision-making and help refine patients' eligibility in a case-by-case workup., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The aging population has presented surgeons with new challenges as they increasingly must operate on greater numbers of frail patients. The modified frailty index 5 (mFI-5) is a concise comorbidity-based scale that has been shown to accurately predict adverse surgical outcomes. In this study, we sought to evaluate the ability of the mFI-5 to predict the risk of postoperative outcomes in breast reconstruction patients., Methods: Utilizing the 2015-2019 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database, we identified 40,415 patients who underwent breast reconstruction, of which 29,562 were implant-based reconstructions and 10,853 were autologous breast reconstructions. Demographic and preoperative variables as well as 30-day postoperative outcomes, including mortality, operation duration, length of hospital stay, medical and surgical complications, and discharge destination, were extracted., Results: Increases in the mFI score correlated with higher rates of reoperation (mFI≥3: 13.5% vs. mFI=0: 5.9%), unplanned readmission (mFI≥3: 10.8% vs. mFI=0: 3.6%), surgical (mFI≥3: 12.2% vs. mFI=0: 4.3%) and medical complications (mFI≥3: 6.8% vs. mFI=0: 1.2%), and lower rates of home discharge (mFI≥3: 96% vs. mFI=0: 99.5%). Multivariate analysis to control for confounders verified significantly higher rates of reoperation (OR=0.01, 95%CI 0.005-0.016), unplanned readmission (OR=0.009, 95%CI 0.005-0.014), and occurrence of surgical complications (OR=0.014, 95%CI 0.009-0.019) and medical complications (OR=0.005, 95%CI 0.002-0.008). Stratification by age showed that the mFI-5 was a stronger risk predictor in younger patients who are frail. Stratification by type of reconstruction showed that increased mFI scores significantly correlated with complications in both autologous and implant-based reconstruction, but the correlation was greater in autologous procedures., Conclusion: The mFI-5 is identified as a powerful risk predictor in breast reconstruction. The application of this easily accessible tool in the preoperative risk stratification of patients undergoing breast reconstruction can enhance treatment planning and support, optimizing patient counseling, informed consent, and decision-making., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Evidence of widespread disparities in healthcare for racial and ethnic minorities is well documented. This study aims to evaluate differences in surgical outcomes after breast reduction surgery (BRS) according to patients' ethnicities., Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database (2005-2018) was utilized to analyze two propensity score matched patient cohorts-White and non-White-that underwent BRS. Preoperative variables assessed included demographic data and comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and obesity. Postoperative outcomes assessed were medical complications, minor and major surgical complications, as well as mortality., Results: In total, 23268 patients underwent BRS and met the inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching, the two cohorts were matched with respect to these preoperative variables, and 7187 patients were included in each cohort of White and non-White patients (total 14374). After matching, overall 30-day major complications were not significantly different between White and non-White cohort (2.25% vs 2.14%, p=0.65). After accounting for differences in confounding variables at the patient and socioeconomic level, racial and ethnic minorities who underwent breast reduction were found to experience fewer minor surgical complications. The analysis of temporal trends identified an overall rise in the number of patients seeking BRS, with a higher increase noted in the non-White population., Conclusion: Overall, our findings are reassuring exemptions to prevalent racial and ethnic health inequalities and can serve as a positive example for adequate and fair provision of surgical care., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT Valentin Haug and Martin Kauke-Navarro are recipients of the German Research Foundation Grant. The sponsors have had no involvement in this study., (Copyright © 2022 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)