Subcutaneous Endoscopy in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Background Scar visibility is a major deterrent to patients seeking reconstructive surgery. Endoscopic surgery can address a wide range of problems, from minimizing or concealing scars to improving access and outcomes in certain situations. This case series includes a wide range of reconstructive surgery problems addressed by subcutaneous endoscopic surgery. Having one or more trained assistants is a major deterrent to the performance of endoscopic surgery by the lone practitioner. The single (or two-port technique for muscle harvest) used in most cases simplifies subcutaneous endoscopic surgery. Methods A single-port endoscopy technique, with a 4-mm, 30-degree side viewing telescope and sheath, optical camera and cold light source, was used. Case records were reviewed for access incisions, procedure abandonment, postoperative pain, complications, and patient satisfaction. Results A total of 53 endoscopic surgical episodes between 2003 and 2013 were reviewed. Using a single port, most cases were done successfully. The access site was changed peroperatively in one case. Complications included transient nerve palsy in one case, which recovered completely. There was minimal intraoperative bleeding. Postoperative pain was low except in one case and managed with minimal analgesia. Patient satisfaction was high in all cases. Conclusions Subsurface endoscopy done on a wide range of reconstructive surgery procedures and resulted in minimal scars and high patient satisfaction.

Imperceptible Scar over Face and Neck: A New Aesthetic Modification of Parotid Incision

Introduction The mainstay of treatment for parotid tumours is surgery. Since the incision site involves visible areas of head and neck several modifications have evolved since its first description in 1912 by Blair and all the subsequent incisions have more or less aimed at giving better aesthesis in terms of post-operative facial scar. We describe a modification of earlier incisions for parotidectomy, which aims at camouflaging the post-operative facial and neck scar. Materials and Methods Fourteen patients were included in this study, who presented with parotid tumours and underwent either superficial or total parotidectomy. The modified incision was used in all the patients and various parameters were recorded (intra operatively as well as post operatively during the follow up visits, upto 1year) including post-operative scar visibility and patient satisfaction in terms of aesthetic appeal. Results All the 14 patients reported highly satisfied in terms of post-operative aesthetic outcome. There was no intra operative limitation of exposure by using this modified incision and neither any significant post-operative complication was encountered. Conclusion Our attempt at evolving an aesthetically modified incision for parotidectomy with no facial or neck scar post-operatively was achieved, along with certain more extended benefits of using this innovative incision.

Comparing three methods for scoring late breast cosmesis in patients treated with lumpectomy and radiation therapy (RT).

128 Background: For intact breast, the Harvard and LENTSOMA criteria are widely used to report late cosmesis. These scales require clinician’s interpretation and thus may be subject to variation between evaluators. Computerized tools exempt from evaluator bias are available to assess cosmesis. The objective of this study was to perform a comparative review of late breast cosmesis using the Harvard, LENTSOMA, and BCCT.core scales (Cardoso JS. et al; doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2007.02.007). Methods: A frontal bilateral breast photograph was used for analysis. Late cosmesis was scored with reference to the baseline breast appearance, ~ 1 year from RT distant from the acute treatment effects. Cosmesis was graded as excellent, good, fair, or poor using the Harvard scale. For LENTSOMA, only atrophy/retraction was assessed from the frontal breast photographs. The BCCT.core software was used as a validated tool for objectively scoring cosmesis and computes a score based on symmetry, color, and scar visibility. All outcomes were assessed by the same investigator (AW). Results: A total of 33 patients had 1-year baseline and follow up photographs. All were treated on a 3-week hypofractionated RT schedule, and none received chemotherapy. One hundred photographs, 1 to 5.7 years from end of RT, were scored. Late cosmesis among patients with good/excellent scores at 1-year remained unchanged by all 3 methods. Among patients graded as fair at 1-year, there was improvement in late comesis detected by Harvard and BCCT.core scoring. Late cosmesis by LENTSOMA criteria remained unchanged from baseline. Conclusions: Our experience suggests easy applicability of BCCT.core for scoring cosmesis in clinical practice. We observed no significant differences in cosmetic score by the methods used. However, these observations were made on a small cohort of patients and evaluation on a larger cohort is needed. The role of objective user-independent grading of cosmesis might be helpful in large comparative studies of clinical outcomes. [Table: see text]