Smoking and its effect on scar healing

Scar formation is influenced by several factors such as wound infection, tension, wound depth and anatomical localization. Hypertrophic scarring is often the result of an imbalance in the wound and scar healing process. The exact underlying pathophysiological mechanism remains unclear. Smoking has a higher risk of postoperative complications probably due to a diminished macrophage induction. Following our clinical impression that smokers without postoperative wound infections show esthetically better scars, we evaluated the scars after a reduction mammaplasty in smoking and nonsmoking patients in a prospective clinical trial. Between July 2006 and September 2007, 13 smokers and 30 non smokers with a reduction mammaplasty were included. They were recruited from Viecuri Medical Centre and Atrium Medical Centre in the Netherlands after written consent. Surgical data and data of the patients' condition were collected. Follow-up for erythema values of the scars was done with a colorimeter (The Minolta CR-300, Minolta Camera Co., Ltd., Osaka Japan) at 1, 3, 6 and 9 months postoperatively on four standardized postsurgical sites. ANOVA and Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis. In the smoking group, the scars were significantly less red compared to the nonsmoking group. No significant differences were found in BMI, resection weight and drain production between both groups. Although smoking is certainly not recommended as a preventive therapy to influence scar healing, this study confirms our assumption that smokers tend to have faster and less erythemateous scar healing to nonsmokers. Further research is needed to understand the mechanism of the effect of smoking on scars

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

Background: Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure and its economic impact is significant. This study aimed to analyse whether a direct one-stage IBBR with use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is more cost-effective than two-stage (expander-implant) breast reconstruction. Methods: The BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage) study was an open-label multicentre RCT in which women scheduled for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate IBBR were randomized between one-stage IBBR with ADM or two-stage IBBR. Duration of surgery and hospital stay, and visits for the primary surgery, unplanned and cosmetic procedures were recorded. Costs were estimated at an institutional level. Health status was assessed by means of the EuroQol Five Dimensions 5L questionnaire. Results: Fifty-nine patients (91 breasts) underwent one-stage IBBR with ADM and 62 patients (92 breasts) two-stage IBBR. The mean(s.d.) duration of surgery in the one-stage group was significantly longer than that for two-stage IBBR for unilateral (2⋅52(0⋅55) versus 2⋅02(0⋅35) h; P < 0⋅001) and bilateral (4⋅03(1⋅00) versus 3⋅25(0⋅58) h; P = 0⋅017) reconstructions. Costs were higher for one-stage compared with two-stage IBBR for both unilateral (€12 448 (95 per cent c.i. 10 722 to 14 387) versus €9871 (9373 to 10 445) respectively; P = 0⋅025) and bilateral (€16 939 (14 887 to 19 360) versus €13 383 (12 414 to 14 669); P = 0⋅002) reconstructions. This was partly related to the use of relatively expensive ADM. There was no difference in postoperative health status between the groups. Conclusion: One-stage IBBR with ADM was associated with higher costs, but similar health status, compared with conventional two-stage IBBR. Registration number: NTR5446 (http://www .trialregister.nl)

Predictors of complications after direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

Background: In the multicentre randomized trial BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage), direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) was associated with a markedly higher postoperative complication rate compared with two-stage tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. This study aimed to identify factors that contribute to the occurrence of complications after DTI ADM-assisted breast reconstruction. Methods: Data were obtained from the BRIOS study, including all patients treated with DTI ADM-assisted breast reconstruction. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors predictive of postoperative complications. Results: Fifty-nine patients (91 breasts) were included, of whom 27 (35 breasts) developed a surgical complication. Reoperations were performed in 29 breasts (32 per cent), with prosthesis removal in 22 (24 per cent). In multivariable analyses, mastectomy weight was associated with complications (odds ratio (OR) 1·94, 95 per cent c.i. 1·33 to 2·83), reoperations (OR 1·70, 1·12 to 2·59) and removal of the implant (OR 1·55, 1·11 to 2·17). Younger patients (OR 1·07, 1·01 to 1·13) and those who received adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 4·83, 1·15 to 20·24) more frequently required reoperation. In univariable analyses, adjuvant radiotherapy showed a trend towards more complications (OR 7·23, 0·75 to 69·95) and removal of the implant (OR 5·12, 0·76 to 34·44), without reaching statistical significance. Conclusion: Breast size appeared to be the most significant predictor of complications in DTI ADM-assisted breast reconstruction. The technique should preferably be performed in patients with small to moderate sized breasts. Registration number: NTR5446 (http://www.trialregister.nl)