Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Incidence of Surgical-Site Infection Is Not Affected by Method of Immediate Breast Reconstruction

Costa, Melinda A. M.D.; Rommer, Elizabeth B.S.; Peric, Mirna B.A.; Nguyen, T. JoAnna M.D.; Shahabi, Ahva M.P.H.; Davis, Gabrielle B. M.D.; Vidar, Evan N. M.A.; Chan, Linda S. Ph.D.; Wong, Alex K. M.D.

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery: July 2013 - Volume 132 - Issue 1 - p 20e–29e
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318290f87e
Breast: Original Articles

Background: To date, few large-scale studies have reported the incidence of surgical-site infection in women undergoing mastectomy with respect to the various methods of immediate breast reconstruction. This study assessed whether the reconstruction method was associated with the risk of surgical-site infection in these patients.

Methods: Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, 9230 female patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction from 2005 to 2009 were identified. Reconstruction was classified as autologous, prosthetic, or hybrid. The primary outcome was the incidence of surgical-site infection within 30 days of operation. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to derive the unadjusted and adjusted risk of surgical-site infection according to reconstruction method.

Results: The overall rate of surgical-site infection was 3.53 percent (95 percent CI, 3.15 to 3.94 percent), with individual rates of 3.33 percent (95 percent CI, 2.93 to 3.76 percent) for prosthetic reconstruction, 4.88 percent (95 percent CI, 3.48 to 6.11 percent) for autologous reconstruction, and 2.19 percent (95 percent CI, 0.88 to 4.45 percent) for hybrid reconstruction. The adjusted odds ratio of surgical-site infection was 1.14 (95 percent CI, 0.83 to 1.58; p = 0.42) for autologous versus prosthetic methods and 0.59 (95 percent CI, 0.27 to 1.27; p = 0.18) for hybrid versus prosthetic methods.

Conclusions: Although the risk of surgical-site infection in patients undergoing immediate reconstruction is highest with autologous and lowest with hybrid methods of reconstruction, the difference in infection risk was not statistically significant after adjustment for confounding factors. Thus, all methods of reconstruction are viable options with regard to risk for surgical-site infection.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Los Angeles, Calif.

From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and the Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California.

Received for publication October 8, 2012; accepted January 30, 2013.

Poster presented at the 90th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Plastic Surgeons, in Boca Raton, Florida, April 9 through 12, 2011.

Disclosure: The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this article.

Alex K. Wong, M.D., Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo Street, Suite 415, Los Angeles, Calif. 90033, alex.wong@med.usc.edu

©2013American Society of Plastic Surgeons