Nitrosative and Oxidative Stresses Contribute to Post-Ischemic Liver Injury Following Severe Hemorrhagic Shock: The Role of Hypoxemic Resuscitation

Purpose: Hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation is frequently associated with liver ischemia-reperfusion injury. The aim of the study was to investigate whether hypoxemic resuscitation attenuates liver injury. Methods: Anesthetized, mechanically ventilated New Zealand white rabbits were exsanguinated to a mean arterial pressure of 30 mmHg for 60 minutes. Resuscitation under normoxemia (Normox-Res group, n = 16, PaO2 = 95–105 mmHg) or hypoxemia (Hypox-Res group, n = 15, PaO 2 = 35–40 mmHg) followed, modifying the FiO 2. Animals not subjected to shock constituted the sham group (n = 11, PaO 2 = 95–105 mmHg). Indices of the inflammatory, oxidative and nitrosative response were measured and histopathological and immunohistochemical studies of the liver were performed. Results: Normox-Res group animals exhibited increased serum alanine aminotransferase, tumor necrosis factor- alpha, interleukin (IL)-1b and IL-6 levels compared with Hypox-Res and sham groups. Reactive oxygen species generation, malondialdehyde formation and myeloperoxidase activity were all elevated in Normox-Res rabbits compared with Hypox-Res and sham groups. Similarly, endothelial NO synthase and inducible NO synthase mRNA expression was up-regulated and nitrotyrosine immunostaining increased in animals resuscitated normoxemically, indicating a more intense nitrosative stress. Hypox-Res animals demonstrated a less prominent histopathologic injury which was similar to sham animals. Conclusions: Hypoxemic resuscitation prevents liver reperfusion injury through attenuation of the inflammatory respons

Physical Characteristics of SurgiMend Meshed Biological ADM in Immediate Prepectoral Implant Breast Reconstruction.

With increasing acceptance of prepectoral implant breast reconstruction, there has been a requirement for biological acellular dermal matrices with conformational properties, high tensile strength, and rapid integration. SurgiMendPRS Meshed is a biological acellular dermal matrix derived from fetal calf with these specific characteristics for prepectoral implant breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to test the performance of this mesh by recreating its surgical use ex-vivo using a variety of implants in an effort to define its physical properties. The mesh is usually attached with a number of interrupted sutures to the implant periphery, the variable being at the inferior border, where it can be attached as a snug fit at the level of the inframammary crease ("tent" technique) or sewn behind the implant, cradling the lower pole ("hammock" technique). The results show mesh elasticity to stretch with increasing implant weight. When used as a "hammock," greater stretch was demonstrated compared with the "tent" technique, allowing greater degrees of ptosis to be achieved. The suture points demonstrated lines of tension that progress evenly over the anterior implant surface. The mesh performed better when used at maximum stretch, but should not be forcibly stretched over an implant as the lines of stress show uneven distribution of lines of tension. These data provide a structural basis on optimum clinical use of this acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral implant breast reconstruction

Physical Characteristics of SurgiMend Meshed Biological ADM in Immediate Prepectoral Implant Breast Reconstruction.

With increasing acceptance of prepectoral implant breast reconstruction, there has been a requirement for biological acellular dermal matrices with conformational properties, high tensile strength, and rapid integration. SurgiMendPRS Meshed is a biological acellular dermal matrix derived from fetal calf with these specific characteristics for prepectoral implant breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to test the performance of this mesh by recreating its surgical use ex-vivo using a variety of implants in an effort to define its physical properties. The mesh is usually attached with a number of interrupted sutures to the implant periphery, the variable being at the inferior border, where it can be attached as a snug fit at the level of the inframammary crease ("tent" technique) or sewn behind the implant, cradling the lower pole ("hammock" technique). The results show mesh elasticity to stretch with increasing implant weight. When used as a "hammock," greater stretch was demonstrated compared with the "tent" technique, allowing greater degrees of ptosis to be achieved. The suture points demonstrated lines of tension that progress evenly over the anterior implant surface. The mesh performed better when used at maximum stretch, but should not be forcibly stretched over an implant as the lines of stress show uneven distribution of lines of tension. These data provide a structural basis on optimum clinical use of this acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral implant breast reconstruction

Satisfaction with Long-Term Aesthetic and 10 Years Oncologic Outcome following Risk-Reducing Mastectomy and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction with or without Nipple Preservation

Incidence of bilateral risk-reducing mastectomies (RRMs) is increasing. The aim of this study was to compare satisfaction, aesthetic and oncological outcomes in women undergoing RRM with implant-based reconstruction comparing nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) (sacrificing the nipple +/− nipple reconstruction). Women who had undergone bilateral RRM between 1997 and 2016 were invited. Aesthetic outcome and nipple symmetry were evaluated using standardized anthropometric measurements. The oncological outcome was assessed at last documented follow up. Ninety-three women (186 breasts) participated, 60 (64.5%) had NSM, 33 (35.5%) SSM. Median time between surgery and participation was 98.4 months (IQR: 61.7–133.9). Of the women, 23/33 (69.7%) who had SSM underwent nipple reconstruction. Nipple projection was shorter in the reconstructed SSM group than the maintained NSM group (p &lt; 0.001). There was no significant difference in overall symmetry (p = 0.670), satisfaction regarding nipple preservation (p = 0.257) or overall nipple satisfaction (p = 0.074). There were no diagnoses of breast cancer at a median follow up of 129 months (IQR: 65–160.6). Women who undergo nipple-sparing RRM maintain long-term nipple symmetry. Nipple projection was less maintained after nipple reconstruction. Although satisfaction with the nipples was higher in the NSM group, this did not reach statistical significance. No breast cancers developed after RRM with long-term follow up.</jats:p

Satisfaction with Long-Term Aesthetic and 10 Years Oncologic Outcome following Risk-Reducing Mastectomy and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction with or without Nipple Preservation.

Incidence of bilateral risk-reducing mastectomies (RRMs) is increasing. The aim of this study was to compare satisfaction, aesthetic and oncological outcomes in women undergoing RRM with implant-based reconstruction comparing nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) (sacrificing the nipple +/− nipple reconstruction). Women who had undergone bilateral RRM between 1997 and 2016 were invited. Aesthetic outcome and nipple symmetry were evaluated using standardized anthropometric measurements. The oncological outcome was assessed at last documented follow up. Ninety-three women (186 breasts) participated, 60 (64.5%) had NSM, 33 (35.5%) SSM. Median time between surgery and participation was 98.4 months (IQR: 61.7−133.9). Of the women, 23/33 (69.7%) who had SSM underwent nipple reconstruction. Nipple projection was shorter in the reconstructed SSM group than the maintained NSM group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in overall symmetry (p = 0.670), satisfaction regarding nipple preservation (p = 0.257) or overall nipple satisfaction (p = 0.074). There were no diagnoses of breast cancer at a median follow up of 129 months (IQR: 65−160.6). Women who undergo nipple-sparing RRM maintain long-term nipple symmetry. Nipple projection was less maintained after nipple reconstruction. Although satisfaction with the nipples was higher in the NSM group, this did not reach statistical significance. No breast cancers developed after RRM with long-term follow up

Outcomes of Different Quality of Life Assessment Modalities After Breast Cancer Therapy: A Network Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Improvement in clinical understanding of the priorities of patients with breast cancer (BC) regarding postoperative aesthetic outcomes (AOs) is needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess expert panel and computerized evaluation modalities against patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), the gold standard of AO assessment, in patients after surgical management of BC. DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov were interrogated from inception through August 5, 2022. Search terms included breast conserving AND aesthetic outcome AND breast cancer. Ten observational studies were eligible for inclusion, with the earliest date of database collection on December 15, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Studies with at least 1 pairwise comparison (PROM vs expert panel or PROM vs computerized evaluation with Breast Cancer Conservation Treatment cosmetic results [BCCT.core] software) were considered eligible if they included patients who received BC treatment with curative intent. Studies reporting solely on risk reduction or benign surgical procedures were excluded to ensure transitivity. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted study data with an independent cross-check from a third reviewer. The quality of included observational studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the level of evidence quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. Confidence in network meta-analysis results was analyzed with the Confidence in Network Meta-analysis semiautomated tool. Effect size was reported using random-effects odds ratios (ORs) and cumulative ratios of ORs with 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome of this network meta-analysis was modality (expert panel or computer software) discordance from PROMs. Four-point Likert responses across PROMs, expert panel assessment, and BCCT.core evaluation of AOs were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 10 observational studies including 3083 patients (median [IQR] age, 59 [50-60] years; median [range] follow-up, 39.0 [22.5-80.5] months) with reported AOs were assessed and homogenized in 4 distinct Likert response groups (excellent, very good, satisfactory, and bad). Overall network incoherence was low (χ22 = 0.35; P = .83). Overall, panel and software modalities graded AO outcomes worse than PROMs. Specifically, for excellent vs all other responses, the panel to PROM ratio of ORs was 0.30 (95% CrI, 0.17-0.53; I2 = 86%) and the BCCT.core to PROM ratio of ORs was 0.28 (95% CrI, 0.13-0.59; I2 = 95%), while the BCCT.core to panel ratio of ORs was 0.93 (95% CrI, 0.46-1.88; I2 = 88%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, patients scored AOs higher than both expert panels and computer software. Standardization and supplementation of expert panel and software AO tools with racially, ethnically, and culturally inclusive PROMs is needed to improve clinical evaluation of the journey of patients with BC and to prioritize components of therapeutic outcomes

Current margin practice and effect on re-excision rates following the publication of the SSO-ASTRO consensus and ABS consensus guidelines: a national prospective study of 2858 women undergoing breast-conserving therapy in the UK and Ireland.

Introduction There is variation in margin policy for breast conserving therapy (BCT) in the UK and Ireland. In response to the Society of Surgical Oncology and American Society for Radiation Oncology (SSO-ASTRO) margin consensus ('no ink on tumour' for invasive and 2 mm for ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]) and the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) consensus (1 mm for invasive and DCIS), we report on current margin practice and unit infrastructure in the UK and Ireland and describe how these factors impact on re-excision rates.Methods A trainee collaborative-led multicentre prospective study was conducted in the UK and Ireland between 1st February and 31st May 2016. Data were collected on consecutive BCT patients and on local infrastructure and policies.Results A total of 79 sites participated in the data collection (75% screening units; average 372 cancers annually, range 70-900). For DCIS, 53.2% of units accept 1 mm and 38% accept 2-mm margins. For invasive disease 77.2% accept 1 mm and 13.9% accept 'no ink on tumour'. A total of 2858 patients underwent BCT with a mean re-excision rate of 17.2% across units (range 0-41%). The re-excision rate would be reduced to 15% if all units applied SSO-ASTRO guidelines and to 14.8% if all units followed ABS guidelines. Of those who required re-operation, 65% had disease present at margin.Conclusion There continues to be large variation in margin policy and re-excision rates across units. Altering margin policies to follow either SSO-ASTRO or ABS guidelines would result in a modest reduction in the national re-excision rate. Most re-excisions are for involved margins rather than close margins