Download PDF
J Reconstr Microsurg 2017; 33(04): 298-304
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1598199
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Impact of Continuous Two-Team Approach in Autologous Breast Reconstruction

A. J. Bauermeister
1   Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Florida
,
A. Zuriarrain
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Florida
,
M. Newman
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Florida
,
S. A. Earle
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Florida
,
M. A. Medina III
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Florida
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

19 September 2016

14 December 2016

Publication Date:
15 February 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Autologous breast reconstruction has been noted in the literature to provide superior aesthetic outcomes and patient satisfaction. Additionally, free perforator flap tissue transfer has the potential for lower abdominal donor site morbidity. However, it has been noted that the percentage of women who are undergoing autologous breast reconstruction in the United States is decreasing. Factors related to the technical difficulty, prolonged operative times, and decreasing reimbursement have been implicated as the causes.

Methods A retrospective review of electronic medical records over a 5-year period was performed with evaluation of 77 autologous breast reconstructions at a single institution. Patient demographics, comorbidities, number of surgeons involved, operative times, length of stay, and postoperative complications were measured. Wilcoxon rank-sum, Pearson's chi-squared, and proportional odds likelihood ratio tests were performed to compare continuous, categorical, and ordinal outcomes, respectively. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for presurgical covariates and laterality.

Results Operative time and length of stay were both significantly lower in the two- versus the single-microsurgeon groups in the unadjusted setting. When covariates and laterality were adjusted for, operative times still remained significantly shorter in the two-microsurgeon group; there were no differences in complications.

Conclusion Based on our findings, we propose that the two-microsurgeon approach can be utilized in more time-consuming microsurgical cases, such as autologous breast reconstruction, to safely decrease operative times and potentially alleviate surgeon fatigue, reduce operative costs, and thus increase overall surgeon productivity.

Keywords

two-microsurgeon - autologous breast reconstruction - free flap
 

  • References

  • 1 Brandberg Y, Malm M, Blomqvist L. A prospective and randomized study, “SVEA,” comparing effects of three methods for delayed breast reconstruction on quality of life, patient-defined problem areas of life, and cosmetic result. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105 (1) 66-74 , discussion 75–76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Teymouri H, Stergioula S, Eder M, Kovacs L, Biemer E, Papadopulos N. Breast reconstruction with autologous tissue following mastectomy. Hippokratia 2006; 10 (4) 153-162
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2015 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report, (2016). http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2015-statistics/2015-plastic-surgery-statistics-report.pdf . Accessed May 9, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Yueh JH, Slavin SA, Adesiyun T , et al. Patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparative evaluation of DIEP, TRAM, latissimus flap, and implant techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 125 (6) 1585-1595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hu ES, Pusic AL, Waljee JF , et al. Patient-reported aesthetic satisfaction with breast reconstruction during the long-term survivorship period. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124 (1) 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sakai S, Ando K, Natori M, Sakai S. Cosmetic reconstruction after resection of breast cancer: use of the ELD-MC flap and EVRAM flap. Int J Clin Oncol 2005; 10 (5) 298-303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Tachi M, Yamada A. Choice of flaps for breast reconstruction. Int J Clin Oncol 2005; 10 (5) 289-297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Papadopulos NA, Kovacs L, Baumann A , et al. [Quality of life and patient satisfaction after breast reconstruction] [in German]. Chirurg 2006; 77 (7) 610-615
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Nahabedian MY, Tsangaris T, Momen B, Manson PN. Infectious complications following breast reconstruction with expanders and implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112 (2) 467-476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Pisano SM, Ledoux PR, Nastala CL. Breast reconstruction in private practice. Semin Plast Surg 2004; 18 (2) 157-173
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2014 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report, ( 2015 http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2014-statistics/plastic-surgery-statsitics-full-report.pdf Accessed May 9, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ , et al. A paradigm shift in U.S. breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131 (1) 15-23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kulkarni AR, Sears ED, Atisha DM, Alderman AK. Use of autologous and microsurgical breast reconstruction by U.S. plastic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (3) 534-541
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Nguyen PD, Herrera FA, Roostaeian J, Da Lio AL, Crisera CA, Festekjian JH. Career satisfaction and burnout in the reconstructive microsurgeon in the United States. Microsurgery 2015; 35 (1) 1-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Balch CM, Freischlag JA, Shanafelt TD. Stress and burnout among surgeons: understanding and managing the syndrome and avoiding the adverse consequences. Arch Surg 2009; 144 (4) 371-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bertges Yost W, Eshelman A, Raoufi M, Abouljoud MS. A national study of burnout among American transplant surgeons. Transplant Proc 2005; 37 (2) 1399-1401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Wurlitzer F. Other contributing factors to burnout among American surgeons. Ann Surg 2010; 252 (4) 707
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Streu R, Hansen J, Abrahamse P, Alderman AK. Professional burnout among US plastic surgeons: results of a national survey. Ann Plast Surg 2014; 72 (3) 346-350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hoppe IC, Pastor CJ, Paik AM. An analysis of leading, lagging, and coincident economic indicators in the United States and its relationship to the volume of plastic surgery procedures performed. Ann Plast Surg 2012; 69 (4) 471-473
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Balch CM, Shanafelt TD, Dyrbye L , et al. Surgeon distress as calibrated by hours worked and nights on call. J Am Coll Surg 2010; 211 (5) 609-619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 United States Department of Health and Human Services. The Affordable Care Act. http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/about-the-law/read-the-law/index.html . Accessed May 9, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Acosta R, Enajat M, Rozen WM , et al. Performing two DIEP flaps in a working day: an achievable and reproducible practice. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010; 63 (4) 648-654
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Wong AK, Joanna Nguyen T, Peric M , et al. Analysis of risk factors associated with microvascular free flap failure using a multi-institutional database. Microsurgery 2015; 35 (1) 6-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gösseringer N, Mani M, Cali-Cassi L, Papadopoulou A, Rodriguez-Lorenzo A. Benefits of two or more senior microsurgeons operating simultaneously in microsurgical breast reconstruction: experience in a Swedish medical center. Microsurgery 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Macario A. What does one minute of operating room time cost?. J Clin Anesth 2010; 22 (4) 233-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar