The better survival rates after breast cancer allow for setting of long-term goals, such as Quality of Life (QoL) and aesthetic outcomes following breast reconstruction. Studies find a higher breast-related QoL and greater satisfaction with breasts following autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) compared to implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). However, aesthetic results from donor sites can influence body image. This concern is little addressed in the literature. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the long-term breast-related and body-related QoL of women who underwent ABR to women who underwent IBR. A multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted between November and December 2020 among women who underwent postmastectomy breast reconstruction between January 2015 and December 2018. A general questionnaire, the BREAST-Q, and the BODY-Q were used to collect data. Multivariable linear regression was performed to adjust differences in Q-scores for potential confounders. In total, 336 patients were included (112 IBR, 224 ABR). Autologous reconstruction resulted in significantly higher mean scores in all subdomains of the BREAST-Q. On the BODY-Q, IBR scored significantly higher on scars, while ABR scored moderately to significantly higher on all other scales. Despite a lower mean score on Hips & outer thighs in women with Lateral Thigh Perforator (LTP) flap reconstruction, no negative influence on body image was found in these women. Long-term breast-related and body-related outcomes of ABR are superior to IBR. Donor site aesthetic does not adversely affect body image in women who underwent free flap breast reconstruction.

Breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a very rare type of T-cell lymphoma that is uniquely caused by a single environmental stimulus. Here, we present a comprehensive genetic analysis of a relatively large series of BIA-ALCL (n = 29), for which genome-wide chromosomal copy number aberrations (CNAs) and mutational profiles for a subset (n = 7) were determined. For comparison, CNAs for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)− nodal anaplastic large cell lymphomas (ALCLs; n = 24) were obtained. CNAs were detected in 94% of BIA-ALCLs, with losses at chromosome 20q13.13 in 66% of the samples. Loss of 20q13.13 is characteristic of BIA-ALCL compared with other classes of ALCL, such as primary cutaneous ALCL and systemic type ALK+ and ALK− ALCL. Mutational patterns confirm that the interleukin-6–JAK1–STAT3 pathway is deregulated. Although this is commonly observed across various types of T-cell lymphomas, the extent of deregulation is significantly higher in BIA-ALCL, as indicated by phosphorylated STAT3 immunohistochemistry. The characteristic loss of chromosome 20 in BIA-ALCL provides further justification to recognize BIA-ALCL as a separate disease entity. Moreover, CNA analysis may serve as a parameter for future diagnostic assays for women with breast implants to distinguish seroma caused by BIA-ALCL from other causes of seroma accumulation, such as infection or trauma.

Rapid identification of possible vascular compromise in free flap reconstruction to minimize time to reoperation improves achieving free flap salvage. Subjective clinical assessment, often complemented with handheld Doppler, is the golden standard for flap monitoring; but this lacks consistency and may be variable. Non-invasive optical methods such as near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) could facilitate objective flap monitoring. A systematic review was conducted to compare NIRS with HSI in detecting vascular compromise in reconstructive flap surgery as compared to standard monitoring. A literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase scientific database in August 2021. Studies were selected by two independent reviewers. Sixteen NIRS and five HSI studies were included. In total, 3662 flap procedures were carried out in 1970 patients using NIRS. Simultaneously; 90 flaps were performed in 90 patients using HSI. HSI and NIRS flap survival were 92.5% (95% CI: 83.3–96.8) and 99.2% (95% CI: 97.8–99.7). Statistically significant differences were observed in flap survival (p = 0.02); flaps returned to OR (p = 0.04); salvage rate (p < 0.01) and partial flap loss rate (p < 0.01). However, no statistically significant difference was observed concerning flaps with vascular crisis (p = 0.39). NIRS and HSI have proven to be reliable; accurate and user-friendly monitoring methods. However, based on the currently available literature, no firm conclusions can be drawn concerning non-invasive monitoring technique superiority

Background: Reconstruction of nasal skin defects can be challenging due to limited skin laxity and underlying cartilage and, therefore, often require a complex repair. The aim of this review is to systematically analyze the literature on nasal skin reconstructions with specific detail to flap reconstructions. Methods: A systematic literature review of nasal skin reconstruction was performed and focused on flap reconstructions. Flap reconstructions were stratified based on defect size, nasal subunit, and reconstruction type. Complication rates (CRs) and patient outcomes were also assessed. Results: A total of 176 articles (11,370 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 59 articles showed various flap techniques. For defects ≤1.5 cm, every subunit had four to six options except the alar rim, which showed one option. Rotation-advancement flaps were mostly used for the nasal tip and sidewall, whereas bilobed flaps were used more for the ala and dorsum. Defects >1.5 cm were most commonly reconstructed with the forehead flap. The mean CR of flap reconstructions was 13.8%. Only 8 of the 176 articles (4.5%) reported patient satisfaction using a standardized questionnaire. Conclusion: This review shows various flap reconstruction options with their corresponding CR that will help guide the surgeon in choosing reconstructive options for different nasal skin defects.