RESUMEN

ABSTRACT: An increasing number of plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) units have transitioned from divisions to departments in recent years. This study aimed to identify quantifiable differences that may reflect challenges and benefits associated with each type of unit. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of publicly-available data on characteristics of academic medical institutions housing PRS units, faculty size of surgical units within these institutions, and academic environments of PRS units themselves. Univariate analysis compared PRS divisions versus departments. Matched-paired testing compared PRS units versus other intra-institutional surgical departments. Compared to PRS divisions (n = 64), departments (n = 22) are at institutions with more surgical departments overall (P = 0.0071), particularly departments that are traditionally divisions within the department of surgery (ie urology). Compared to PRS divisions, PRS departments have faculty size that more closely resembles other intra-institutional surgical departments, especially for full-time surgical faculty and faculty in areas of clinical overlap with other departments like hand surgery. Plastic and reconstructive surgery departments differ from PRS divisions by certain academic measures, including offering more clinical fellowships (P = 0.005), running more basic science laboratories (P = 0.033), supporting more nonclinical research faculty (P = 0.0417), and training residents who produce more publications during residency (P = 0.002). Institutions with PRS divisions may be less favorable environments for surgical divisions to become departments, but other recently-transitioned divisions could provide blueprints for PRS to follow suit. Bolstering full-time surgical faculty numbers and faculty in areas of clinical overlap could be useful for PRS divisions seeking departmental status. Transitioning to department may yield objective academic benefits for PRS units.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Cost-utility analyses assess health gains acquired by interventions by incorporating weighted health state utility values (HSUVs). HSUVs are important in plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) because they include qualitative metrics when comparing operative techniques or interventions. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify the extent and quality of existing original utilities research within PRS. METHODS: A systematic review of articles with original PRS utility data was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Subspecialty, survey sample size, and respondent characteristics were extracted. For each HSUV, the utility measure [direct (standard gamble, time trade off, visual analog scale) and/or indirect], mean utility score, and measure of variance were recorded. Similar HSUVs were pooled into weighted averages based on sample size if they were derived from the same utility measure. RESULTS: In total, 348 HSUVs for 194 disease states were derived from 56 studies within seven PRS subspecialties. Utility studies were most common in breast (n = 17, 30.4%) and hand/upper extremity (n = 15, 26.8%), and direct measurements were most frequent [visual analog scale (55.4%), standard gamble (46.4%), time trade off (57.1%)]. Studies surveying the general public had more respondents (n = 165, IQR 103-299) than those that surveyed patients (n = 61, IQR 48-79) or healthcare professionals (n = 42, IQR 10-109). HSUVs for 18 health states were aggregated. CONCLUSIONS: The HSUV literature within PRS is scant and heterogeneous. Researchers should become familiar with these outcomes, as integrating utility and cost data will help illustrate that the impact of certain interventions are cost-effective when we consider patient quality of life.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Reduction mammaplasty is a mainstay in the treatment of symptomatic macromastia, with a well-described positive impact on patient quality-of-life (QoL). Absorbable dermal staplers have the potential to improve the efficiency of skin closure in reduction mammoplasties, but a more comprehensive assessment of its impact on key outcomes has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing reduction mammoplasty between November 2018 and December 2020 was conducted. Patients were included if they had undergone a wise-pattern reduction with a superomedial pedicle and completed 3 months of follow-up. Patient demographics, operative information, clinical and aesthetic outcomes, and QoL were compared between patients that had INSORB stapler-assisted and suture-only closures. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients met the inclusion criteria, with 34 patients (45%) in the stapler cohort. Total procedure time was significantly reduced with the use of the dermal stapler (stapler: 154 vs. suture: 170 minutes; p = 0.003). The incidence of major complications was similar between cohorts (stapler: 8.8% vs. suture: 12%; p = 0.64), as was the incidence of minor complications (stapler: 44% vs. suture: 41%; p = 0.82). Regardless of closure technique, patients demonstrated significant increases in all QoL domains (p <0.001). Lastly, 10 independent raters found no difference in the cosmetic appearance of breasts from either cohort, when judging overall breast appearance, shape, scars, volume and the nipple-areolar complex (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The dermal stapler improves efficiency of closure during reduction mammoplasty without increasing the incidence of wound healing complications. Additionally, cosmetic outcomes are not affected, and patients demonstrate similar post-operative satisfaction with the result regardless of closure technique.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: While mesh re-enforcement and advanced surgical techniques are cornerstones of complex ventral hernia repair (CVHR), the risk of complications and recurrence is common. We aim to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and patient reported outcomes (PROs) of patients undergoing CVHR with onlay Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB). METHODS: Adult (>18 y old) patients undergoing VHR with P4HB (Phasix) in the onlay plane by a single surgeon from 01/2015 to 05/2020 were reviewed. VHR was considered complex if patients had significant co-morbidities, large abdominal wall defects, a history of extensive abdominal surgery, and/or concurrent intra-abdominal pathology. A composite of postoperative outcomes including surgical site occurrences (SSO), surgical site infection (SSI), and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention (SSOpi), as well as PROs as defined by the Abdominal Hernia-Q (AHQ), were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 51 patients were included with average age and body mass index of 56.4 and 29.9 kg/m2. Median follow up was 20 mo with a hernia recurrence rate of 5.9% (n = 3). 21 patients had an SSO (41.2%), 8 had an SSI (15.7%), and 6 had an SSOpi (11.8%). There was an association with Ventral Hernia Working Group ≥ 2 and development of SSO. There was a significant improvement in overall PROs (P < 0.0001) with no difference in those patients with and without complications (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: For hernia patients with large defects and complex intra-abdominal pathology, a safe and effective repair is difficult. The use of onlay P4HB was associated with acceptable postoperative outcomes and recurrence rate.

Asunto(s)