Luci Hulsman

Breast lymphedema is characterized by skin thickening/swelling of the breast and is common following partial mastectomy and radiation. Oncoplastic reduction performed during partial mastectomy removes additional breast tissue compared to partial mastectomy alone to optimize breast contour. Recent literature has suggested oncoplastic reduction in patients with macromastia undergoing breast-conservation surgery is protective of breast lymphedema, decreasing rates from 11% to 3%. The purpose of this study is to assess the rates of breast lymphedema after partial mastectomy and oncoplastic reduction and identify risk factors. A single-center retrospective study was performed of breast cancer patients following partial mastectomy and oncoplastic reduction (2018–2023). Patients underwent contralateral breast reduction for symmetry. Breast lymphedema was assessed. Demographics data and risk factors were evaluated. This study included 158 patients who underwent partial mastectomy and oncoplastic reduction. Breast lymphedema incidence was 3.2% (5/158). Including contralateral non-cancerous breast symmetry reduction, lymphedema occurred in 3.6% (5/140) of irradiated breasts and 0% (0/176) of non-irradiated breasts (p = 0.0164). Among irradiated breasts, skin necrosis occurred in 11.4% (16/140) compared to 4.5% (8/176) of non-irradiated breasts (p = 0.031). Breast lymphedema developed 207.4 ± 37.6 days postoperatively and 101.6 ± 15.9 days following adjuvant radiation. Mean follow-up was 639 days. Breast lymphedema incidence following partial mastectomy and oncoplastic reduction was 3.6% in this series and occurs 3–4 months after radiation. Radiation was the only significant risk factor for developing breast lymphedema. This largest series on breast lymphedema after oncoplastic reduction corroborates that oncoplastic reduction may be protective.

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is the most common cause of secondary lymphedema in the Western world and occurs in up to one-third of breast cancer survivors following axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Compression of the affected limb is a mainstay of therapy. Surgical management of BCRL involves excision of excess fibroadipose tissue and physiologic procedures to improve fluid retention in the limb. Once lymphedema is established, the inflammatory cascade and fibrosis render the disease hard to reverse. The purpose of this review is to elucidate existing management strategies for prevention of breast cancer-related lymphedema. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and Scopus. Articles that included management strategies for prevention of BCRL were selected for review. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) is a microsurgical technique that connects disrupted axillary lymphatic vessels to nearby veins by lymphovenous anastomoses at the time of ALND and has been shown to reduce rates of lymphedema from 30% to 4–12%. BCRL remains incurable. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction has emerged as a preventative strategy to reduce rates of lymphedema in breast cancer patients.

Background: Surgical reimbursement rates are established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Studies have indicated that revision hip (rTHA) and knee (rTKA) arthroplasties require significantly more work effort, but are reimbursed less than primary procedures. This study quantified planned and unplanned work performed for revision surgeries by the surgeon and/or the surgeon’s team during the episode of care “reimbursement window.” Quantification of time was performed separately for aseptic and septic (two-stage) revisions and compared to allowed reimbursement amounts. Methods: All unilateral rTHA and rTKA procedures performed over a 10-year period by a single surgeon at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Time dedicated to planned work was calculated over each episode of care, from surgery scheduling to 90 days postoperatively. Impromptu patient inquiries and treatments after discharge, but within the episode of care, involving the surgeon/surgeon team constituted unplanned work. Planned and unplanned work minutes were summed and divided by the number of patients reviewed to obtain average minutes of work per patient. Results: Calculations demonstrated average per patient work for aseptic rTKA exceeded the reimbursable amount by 31 minutes. Calculated average minutes of work per patient required for aseptic rTHA fell within the number of minutes approved for reimbursement. Average per patient work for septic rTKA and rTHA exceeded the reimbursable amounts by 331 and 166 minutes, respectively, equating to 2.8 to 5.5 hours of uncompensated time. Conclusion: Revision hip and knee procedures are substantially more complex than primary procedures, with many surgeons referring patients to out-of-network care. Financially dis-incentivizing surgeons to care for these patients reduces patient access to care when high quality care is needed the most, especially infection cases susceptible to high sepsis and mortality rates. Study findings will be applied to advocacy efforts for appropriate legislative reform.