All Publications

  • Comparing the Outcomes and Complication Rates of Biologic vs Synthetic Meshes in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review. Annals of plastic surgery Makarewicz, N., Perrault, D., Sharma, A., Shaheen, M., Kim, J., Calderon, C., Sweeney, B., Nazerali, R. 2023; 90 (5): 516-527


    This systematic review evaluates all published studies comparing biologic and synthetic meshes in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR), to determine which category of mesh produces the most favorable outcomes.Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women globally. Implant-based breast reconstruction is currently the most popular method of postmastectomy reconstruction, and recently, the use of surgical mesh in IBBR has become commonplace. Although there is a long-standing belief among surgeons that biologic mesh is superior to synthetic mesh in terms of surgical complications and patient outcomes, few studies exist to support this claim.A systematic search of the EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases was performed in January 2022. Primary literature studies comparing biologic and synthetic meshes within the same experimental framework were included. Study quality and bias were assessed using the validated Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria.After duplicate removal, 109 publications were reviewed, with 12 meeting the predetermined inclusion criteria. Outcomes included common surgical complications, histological analysis, interactions with oncologic therapies, quality of life measures, and esthetic outcomes. Across all 12 studies, synthetic meshes were rated as at least equivalent to biologic meshes for every reported outcome. On average, the studies in this review tended to have moderate Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies scores.This systematic review offers the first comprehensive evaluation of all publications comparing biologic and synthetic meshes in IBBR. The consistent finding that synthetic meshes are at least equivalent to biologic meshes across a range of clinical outcomes offers a compelling argument in favor of prioritizing the use of synthetic meshes in IBBR.

    View details for DOI 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003512

    View details for PubMedID 37146317

  • Preneoplastic stromal cells promote BRCA1-mediated breast tumorigenesis NATURE GENETICS Nee, K., Ma, D., Nguyen, Q. H., Pein, M., Pervolarakis, N., Insua-Rodriguez, J., Gong, Y., Hernandez, G., Alshetaiwi, H., Williams, J., Rauf, M., Dave, K., Boyapati, K., Hasnain, A., Calderon, C., Markaryan, A., Edwards, R., Lin, E., Parajuli, R., Zhou, P., Nie, Q., Shalabi, S., LaBarge, M. A., Kessenbrock, K. 2023: 595-606


    Women with germline BRCA1 mutations (BRCA1+/mut) have increased risk for hereditary breast cancer. Cancer initiation in BRCA1+/mut is associated with premalignant changes in breast epithelium; however, the role of the epithelium-associated stromal niche during BRCA1-driven tumor initiation remains unclear. Here we show that the premalignant stromal niche promotes epithelial proliferation and mutant BRCA1-driven tumorigenesis in trans. Using single-cell RNA sequencing analysis of human preneoplastic BRCA1+/mut and noncarrier breast tissues, we show distinct changes in epithelial homeostasis including increased proliferation and expansion of basal-luminal intermediate progenitor cells. Additionally, BRCA1+/mut stromal cells show increased expression of pro-proliferative paracrine signals. In particular, we identify pre-cancer-associated fibroblasts (pre-CAFs) that produce protumorigenic factors including matrix metalloproteinase 3 (MMP3), which promotes BRCA1-driven tumorigenesis in vivo. Together, our findings demonstrate that precancerous stroma in BRCA1+/mut may elevate breast cancer risk through the promotion of epithelial proliferation and an accumulation of luminal progenitor cells with altered differentiation.

    View details for DOI 10.1038/s41588-023-01298-x

    View details for Web of Science ID 000948843800003

    View details for PubMedID 36914836

    View details for PubMedCentralID 8167363

  • Effectiveness of melatonin treatment for sleep disturbance in orthopaedic trauma patients: A prospective, randomized control trial. Injury Tanner, N., Schultz, B., Calderon, C., Fithian, A., Segovia, N., Bishop, J., Gardner, M. 2022; 53 (12): 3945-3949


    Explore sleep disturbance in postoperative orthopedic trauma patients and determine the impact of melatonin supplementation on postoperative sleep, pain, and quality of life.In this prospective, randomized controlled trial at a Level I trauma center, 84 adult orthopedic trauma patients with operative fracture management were randomized 2-weeks postoperatively to either the melatonin or placebo group. Patients randomized to the melatonin group (42 subjects, mean age 41.8 ± 15.5 years) received 5 mg melatonin supplements. Patients in the placebo group (42 subjects, mean age 41.3 ± 14.0 years) received identical glucose tablets. Both groups were instructed to take the tablets 30 minutes before bed for 4 weeks and received sleep hygiene education and access to the Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) Coach app.Our primary outcome was sleep quality as measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Secondary outcomes were pain measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), quality of life measured by the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), and opioid use.Patients in both groups had significant sleep disturbance (PSQI ≥ 5) at 2-weeks (83%) and 6-weeks (67%) postoperatively. PSQI improved by 3.3 points (p<0.001) at follow-up, but there was no significant difference between groups (melatonin PSQI = 5.6, placebo PSQI = 6.1, P = 0.615). Compared to placebo, melatonin did not affect VAS, SF-36, or opioid use significantly.Sleep disturbance is prevalent in orthopedic trauma patients. Melatonin treatment did not significantly improve subjective sleep quality, pain, quality of life or opioid use.Therapeutic Level I.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.injury.2022.10.011

    View details for PubMedID 36424687

  • Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for Extremity Open Wound Management: A Review of the Literature. Journal of orthopaedic trauma Van Rysselberghe, N. L., Gonzalez, C. A., Calderon, C., Mansour, A., Oquendo, Y. A., Gardner, M. J. 2022; 36 (Suppl 4): S6-S11


    SUMMARY: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with reticulated open cell foam is used commonly in orthopaedic trauma, particularly in the management of complex open fracture wounds. This article reviews the literature to date regarding this adjunctive treatment, particularly in regard to removal of infectious material, temporary management of wounds pending soft tissue reconstruction, combat wounds, and over split-thickness skin grafts. Mechanism of action is also reviewed, including stabilization of the wound environment, edema control, macrodeformation, and microdeformation effects. Use of NPWT as an adjunct in management of open fractures along with operative debridement, systemic antibiotics, and early soft tissue reconstruction are the highest yield interventions for managing open fracture wounds with infection. NPWT as an adjunct therapy in the protocol for open fractures seems to add additional clinical benefit for patients with severe open fracture wounds not amenable to primary, immediate closure.

    View details for DOI 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002430

    View details for PubMedID 35994302