In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has gained popularity, even in the field of plastic surgery. It is increasingly common for patients to use the internet to gather information about plastic surgery, and AI-based chatbots, such as ChatGPT, could be employed to answer patients' questions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of medical information provided by ChatGPT regarding three of the most common procedures in breast plastic surgery: breast reconstruction, breast reduction, and augmentation mammaplasty. The quality of information was evaluated through the expanded EQIP scale. Responses were collected from a pool made by ten resident doctors in plastic surgery and then processed by SPSS software ver. 28.0. The analysis of the contents provided by ChatGPT revealed sufficient quality of information across all selected topics, with a high bias in terms of distribution of the score between the different items. There was a critical lack in the “Information data field” (0/6 score in all the 3 investigations) but a very high overall evaluation concerning the “Structure data” (>7/11 in all the 3 investigations). Currently, AI serves as a valuable tool for patients; however, engineers and developers must address certain critical issues. It is possible that models like ChatGPT will play an important role in improving patient's consciousness about medical procedures and surgical interventions in the future, but their role must be considered ancillary to that of surgeons.

Background and Objectives: Conservative treatment represents an essential pillar of lymphedema management, along with debulking and physiologic surgeries. Despite the consistent number of treatment options, there is currently no agreement on their indications and possible combinations. When dealing with unusual lymphedema presentation as in the genitalia (Genital Lymphedema—GL), treatment choice becomes even more difficult. The authors aimed to present their targeted algorithm of single and combined treatment modalities for rare GL in order to face this paucity of information. Materials and Methods: Data were collected from a prospectively maintained database since January 1983, and cases of GL that were managed in the authors’ department were selected. Only patients that were treated in the authors’ institution and presented a minimum follow-up of 3 months were admitted to the current study. Results: From January 1983 to July 2021, 19 patients with GL were recruited. All the patients were male, and their ages ranged from 21 to 73 years old (average: 52). Ten cases (52.6%) presented with ISL (International Society of Lymphology) stage I, five (26.3%) were stage II and four (21.1%) were stage III. GL was managed with conservative treatment (12 cases), LVA (LymphaticoVenous Anastomosis) (3) or surgical excision (4). In a mean follow-up of 7.5 years (range: 3 months—11 years), no major complications occurred, and all cases reached improvements in functional and quality of life terms. Conclusions: Contrary to the predominant thought of the necessity to avoid surgery in unusual lymphedema presentations such as GL, they can be managed using targeted multimodal approaches or by adapting well-known procedures in unusual ways to achieve control of disease progression and improve patients’ quality of life.

Background and Aim: Intraoperative lymphatic mapping and selective lymph node biopsy is accepted worldwide as the standard procedure for staging regional lymph nodes of 1–4 mm thick melanomas, as well as for other neoplasms. Although it is often stated that selective lymph node biopsy is a minimally invasive procedure associated with few complications, few data exist concerning the morbidity associated with the procedure. The present analysis was performed to evaluate the morbidity associated with selective lymph node biopsy in a long-term follow-up. Materials and Methods: The study provides a review of 437 selective lymph node biopsies on 269 patients, operated on between the 1994 and the 2009, for the lymph node biopsy of head and neck, groin, axilla, upper and lower limbs and nodal basins. Patients’ history and follow-up were reviewed for 2 weeks after surgery, every 3 months for the first 2 years, every 4 months during the third year, and every 6 months subsequently, and postoperative morbidity was evaluated. Results: After sentinel node biopsy, 14 patients developed one of the following complications: hematoma, 1 case (0.30%); lymphedema, 1 case (0.30%); seroma, 2 cases (0.61%); wound infection, 6 cases (1.83%); keloid scar, 2 cases (0.61%); and postoperative pain, 2 cases (0.61%). The total complication rate was 4.26%. Conclusions: Selective lymph node biopsy for melanoma, as for other tumors, in respect to radical lymphadenectomy, is not a complications-free procedure but is usually not severe.

Introduction: The timing of contralateral symmetrisation in patients with large and ptotic breasts undergoing a unilateral skin-reducing mastectomy (SRM) is one of the most debated topics in the reconstructive field. There is no evidence to support the advantage of immediate or delayed symmetrisation to help surgeons with this decision. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and aesthetic outcomes of immediate symmetrisation. Methods: A randomised observational study was conducted on patients who underwent an SRM for unilateral breast cancer. Based on a simple randomisation list, patients were divided into two groups: a delayed symmetrisation group versus an immediate symmetrisation group. The postoperative complications, BREAST-Q outcomes and reoperations were compared. Results: Out of a total of 84 patients undergoing an SRM between January 2018 and January 2021, 42 patients underwent immediate symmetrisation and 42 patients had delayed symmetrisation. Three implant losses (7.2%) were observed and we reported three wound dehiscences; one of these was in a contralateral breast reconstruction in the immediate symmetrisation group. The BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measures recorded better aesthetic outcomes and a high patient satisfaction for the immediate symmetrisation group. Conclusions: Simultaneous controlateral symmetrisation is a good alternative to achieve better satisfaction and quality of life for patients; from a surgical point of view, it does not excessively impact on the second time of reconstruction.

Implant related infection is one of the most frequent complications in orthopaedic and trauma surgery. Local antibiotic treatment strategies are becoming part of the prevention and treatment methodology for this fearful complication. To date, there are two coatings available on the market, both with a polylactic acid base. Current evidence supports the use of these types of coatings in the prophylaxis of periprosthetic infections and fracture-related infections. However, their therapeutic use has been less investigated. The purpose of this article is to summarise recent evidence relating to the clinical application of antibacterial hydrogels and coatings in orthopaedic and traumatology surgery and indicating which future applications may benefit from it.

Background: COVID-19 is a new human-infecting coronavirus for which the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic. The first Italian cases occurred in February 2020: since then, there has been an exponential increase in new cases, hospitalizations and intensive care assistance demand. This new and sudden scenario led to a forced National Health System reorganization and review of welfare priorities. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of this pandemic on ordinary activities in two plastic surgery divisions in Rome, hosted in a COVID-19 and a non-COVID-19 hospital. Methods: The data of this comparative retrospective study was collected between 9 March and 9 April 2019 and the same period of 2020 from two plastic surgery units, one in a COVID-19 hospital and second in a non-COVID-19 hospital in Rome, Italy. The 2019–2020 data of the two hospitals was compared regarding the number of surgeries, post-operative dressings and first consultations performed. Results: Both units sustained a decrease in workload due to lockdown effects. Statistically significant differences for day surgery procedures (p value = 0.0047) and first consultations (p value < 0.0001) were found between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 institutes, with a drastic trend limiting non-urgent access to COVID-19 hospitals. Conclusions: The long-term effects of healthcare reshuffling in the “COVID-19 era” imply a delay in the diagnosis and treatment of skin cancer and cancellation of many reconstructive procedures. These findings pose a question on the future consequences of a long-term limitation in plastic surgery healthcare. Level of evidence: Level III, risk/prognostic study.