Skip to main content
Daily Report

Daily Cosmetic Research Analysis

06/15/2025
3 papers selected
3 analyzed

A controlled time-series study from Scotland links universal ICU decolonisation to higher MRSE bloodstream infections and shows that de-escalation reduces resistant lineages. A systematic review suggests neoadjuvant radiotherapy may enable immediate breast reconstruction with favorable cosmetic outcomes and acceptable complication rates. A clinical review underscores validated psychological screening tools preoperatively in aesthetic surgery to improve patient selection and outcomes.

Summary

A controlled time-series study from Scotland links universal ICU decolonisation to higher MRSE bloodstream infections and shows that de-escalation reduces resistant lineages. A systematic review suggests neoadjuvant radiotherapy may enable immediate breast reconstruction with favorable cosmetic outcomes and acceptable complication rates. A clinical review underscores validated psychological screening tools preoperatively in aesthetic surgery to improve patient selection and outcomes.

Research Themes

  • ICU infection prevention strategy and antimicrobial resistance
  • Radiotherapy sequencing with immediate breast reconstruction and cosmetic outcomes
  • Preoperative psychological screening in aesthetic plastic surgery

Selected Articles

1. Universal versus targeted chlorhexidine and mupirocin decolonisation and clinical and molecular epidemiology of Staphylococcus epidermidis bloodstream infections in patients in intensive care in Scotland, UK: a controlled time-series and longitudinal genotypic study.

80Level IIICohort
The Lancet. Microbe · 2025PMID: 40516572

In two ICUs with divergent policies, de-escalating from universal to targeted decolonisation did not increase overall bloodstream infections but significantly reduced MRSE-BSI incidence and the proportion of multidrug-resistant sequence types. MRSE-BSI incidence was positively associated with chlorhexidine use, suggesting selection pressure from universal biocide exposure.

Impact: This quasi-experimental study integrates clinical epidemiology with genotyping to show that universal decolonisation can select for MRSE and that de-escalation mitigates this risk. It informs infection-prevention policy in ICUs with low MRSA prevalence.

Clinical Implications: ICUs with low MRSA prevalence should consider shifting from universal to targeted decolonisation, monitor MRSE epidemiology, and rationalise chlorhexidine exposure to reduce selection of resistant S. epidermidis without increasing overall BSI.

Key Findings

  • De-escalation at ICU1 reduced MRSE-BSI incidence from 10.4 to 4.3 per 1000 occupied bed days with no rise in overall BSI; no parallel changes occurred at the control ICU.
  • The probability that SE-BSI were MRSE fell from 89.2% to 56.7% after de-escalation.
  • MRSE-BSI incidence density correlated positively with chlorhexidine use but not with mupirocin.
  • Genotyping (MLST and WGS) showed fewer multidrug-resistant sequence types and mobile genetic elements after de-escalation.

Methodological Strengths

  • Before-after-control-impact time-series design across two ICUs over 12+ years
  • Integration of phenotypic susceptibility with MLST and whole-genome sequencing

Limitations

  • Retrospective observational design susceptible to confounding
  • Generalizability limited to two adjacent health boards and low-MRSA settings

Future Directions: Prospective multicentre or cluster-randomised evaluations of decolonisation strategies, dose-response of chlorhexidine exposure, and routine genomic surveillance to track resistance evolution.

BACKGROUND: There are concerns that biocide skin and mucous membrane decolonisation, which is widely used to prevent health-care-associated infections in intensive care units (ICUs), might select for multidrug-resistant pathogens. We aimed to evaluate the effects of de-escalating from universal to targeted skin and nasal decolonisation on Staphylococcus epidermidis bloodstream infections (SE-BSI). METHODS: We did a retrospective, before-after-control-impact time-series analysis and longitudinal genotypic study in two ICUs with divergent decolonisation practice in tertiary care hospitals of adjacent health boards in Scotland, UK. Participants were aged at least 16 years and admitted between July 1, 2009, and Feb 28, 2022. There were no exclusion criteria for the study. In ICU one (intervention site) universal decolonisation in all admissions was de-escalated to targeted decolonisation of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriers on Feb 1, 2019, while in ICU two (control site) targeted decolonisation was applied throughout. We collected bloodstream infection data from all causes, including clinically significant SE-BSI. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was used to define meticillin-resistant S epidermidis (MRSE) and chlorhexidine susceptibility. We used multilocus sequence typing to identify sequence types from archived SE-BSI isolates. Whole-genome sequencing was applied to a sample from ICU one. The primary outcomes were incidence densities of all bloodstream infections, SE-BI, and meticillin-resistant S epidermidis bloodstream infections (MRSE-BSI), and the percentage probability that SE-BSI were MRSE-BSI. The effects of de-escalation on primary outcomes were estimated by differences between the intervention and control sites, before and after de-escalation, using a before-after-control-impact time-series design. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of multidrug resistant sequence types, carriage of mobile genetic elements and genes for multidrug resistance and biofilm production. FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2009, and Feb 28, 2022, S epidermidis was identified in 334 (45%) of 735 bloodstream infections in ICU one, of which 197 occurred before the de-escalation intervention in Feb 1, 2019, and S epidermidis was identified in 167 (60%) of 278 bloodstream infections in ICU two. There was no increase in all bloodstream infection incidence coinciding with de-escalation in ICU one, whereas MRSE-BSI incidence declined significantly from 10·4 cases per 1000 occupied bed days (OBDs; 95% credible interval [CrI] 7·2-15·4) to 4·3 cases per 1000 OBDs (2·5-6·7), as did the percentage probability of MRSE (from 89·2%, 95% CrI 77·8-96·5 to 56·7%, 34·3-77·5%). No significant changes in the primary outcomes were seen in ICU two. MRSE-BSI incidence density was positively associated with chlorhexidine use, but not mupirocin use. De-escalation was associated with a reduced proportion of SE-BSI due to multidrug-resistant sequence types and reduced carriage of mobile genetic elements and genes for multidrug resistance and biofilm production, as observed by multi-locus sequence typing and whole genome sequencing. INTERPRETATION: In ICU settings with low MRSA incidence, the benefits of universal decolonisation should be balanced against the risks of selecting MRSE sequence types adapted for invasive and device-associated infection. FUNDING: National Health Service Grampian Charity.

2. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy and immediate breast reconstruction: A systematic review of literature of the last decade.

77Level IISystematic Review
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2025PMID: 40516884

Across 21 studies (1,199 patients), neoadjuvant radiotherapy followed by immediate breast reconstruction yielded generally excellent-to-good cosmetic outcomes and acceptable complication rates, with low implant loss and no complete flap failures. Oncologic outcomes, including pCR (12–53%) and locoregional recurrence (3–10%), were within expected ranges, supporting feasibility while calling for randomized confirmation.

Impact: This systematic review synthesizes patient-reported, surgical, and oncologic outcomes for NART enabling IBR, informing multidisciplinary sequencing decisions in breast cancer care.

Clinical Implications: In centers with NART capability, considering NART followed by immediate reconstruction may improve patient satisfaction and streamline treatment timelines, with careful patient selection and multidisciplinary planning.

Key Findings

  • Included 21 studies (1,199 patients) with mean follow-up 35 months; six studies compared NART vs adjuvant RT.
  • Patient-reported cosmetic outcomes were excellent-to-good; one comparative study favored NART over adjuvant RT.
  • Complications: no complete flap failures, low implant loss; unplanned reoperation mean 11% (2–21%); grade 3 skin toxicity 1–17% with no grade 4–5 events; mastectomy skin necrosis 3–17%.
  • Oncologic outcomes: pCR 12–53% after NARCT; locoregional recurrence 3–10%.

Methodological Strengths

  • Systematic search across PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane with risk-of-bias appraisal
  • Comprehensive synthesis of PROMs, complications, and oncologic outcomes

Limitations

  • Predominance of non-randomised designs and inclusion of conference abstracts
  • Heterogeneity in regimens (e.g., high use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy) and outcomes reporting

Future Directions: Randomised head-to-head trials of NART vs adjuvant RT with standardised cosmetic and complication endpoints, and longer oncologic follow-up.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) of the chestwall in breast cancer treatment negatively influences complication rates and cosmetic outcomes of breast reconstructions (BR). Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART) offers potential advantages, theoretically enabling immediate BR (IBR) with less complications. This comprehensive systematic review provides an overview of patient-reported, complications, and oncological outcomes of NART followed by IBR in breast cancer treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, Ovid EMBASE and Cochrane library including studies published between 2014-2024. Risk of bias and methodological quality were appraised. RESULTS: Twenty-one articles (16 journal articles, 5 abstracts) involving 1.199 patients (mean follow-up 35 months) were included. Six studies compared NART to adjuvant RT, with majority of patients (98 %) receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Patient-reported outcomes, assessed in three studies, reported excellent-to-good cosmetic outcomes, with one reporting significantly better on cosmetic outcomes for NART compared to adjuvant RT. Complications were reported in eighteen studies. There were no complete flap failures, loss of implant rates were low. Mean incidence of unplanned surgical intervention was 11 % (range: 2-21 %). Grade 3 skin toxicity ranged from 1-17 %, with no Grade 4-5 events. Mastectomy skin necrosis varied from 3-17 %. Pathological complete response after NARCT was achieved in 12-53 % of patients, and locoregional recurrences ranged between 3 %-10 %. CONCLUSION: This review indicates that NART followed by IBR may result in higher patient satisfaction, lower complication rates and shorter total treatment time compared to adjuvant RT. Randomized trials with head-on comparison between NART and adjuvant RT are needed to confirm this.

3. Validated Survey Tools for Pre-operative Psychological Assessment in Plastic Surgery.

57.5Level IVSystematic Review
Clinics in plastic surgery · 2025PMID: 40516991

This review outlines validated patient-reported outcome measures (BREAST-Q, FACE-Q, BODY-Q) and advocates preoperative psychological screening, including for body dysmorphic disorder, in plastic surgery. It highlights practical barriers for surgeons and aligns with guideline recommendations to improve holistic care.

Impact: By consolidating validated tools and guideline recommendations, it provides a practical framework for integrating psychological assessment into preoperative workflows in aesthetic and reconstructive surgery.

Clinical Implications: Implement routine screening for psychological disorders (e.g., BDD) and incorporate PROMs (BREAST-Q, FACE-Q, BODY-Q) into preoperative consultations, with referral pathways to mental health professionals.

Key Findings

  • Validated PROMs (BREAST-Q, FACE-Q, BODY-Q) measure quality of life and satisfaction in surgical patients.
  • Cosmetic surgery patients have high rates of psychological disorders, underscoring the need for preoperative screening.
  • Guidelines (e.g., NICE) recommend screening for body dysmorphic disorder before surgery.
  • Surgeons face time and familiarity barriers when integrating psychological assessments.

Methodological Strengths

  • Synthesis of validated instruments and practical implementation considerations
  • Alignment with external guideline recommendations (e.g., NICE)

Limitations

  • Narrative review without systematic search or quantitative synthesis
  • Heterogeneity and potential bias in cited studies limit strength of inference

Future Directions: Prospective studies to validate streamlined screening pathways and thresholds, and trials linking preoperative psychological screening to postoperative satisfaction and complication reduction.

Psychological assessment in plastic and reconstructive surgery is gaining recognition, prompting interest in preoperative screening. Surgeons face challenges in integrating these evaluations due to time constraints and unfamiliarity with psychological measures. Patient-reported outcome measures, such as BREAST-Q, FACE-Q, and BODY-Q, assess quality of life and satisfaction in surgical patients. Studies indicate high rates of psychological disorders among cosmetic surgery patients, highlighting the need for screening. Some guidelines, like those from the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, recommend preoperative screening for conditions like body dysmorphic disorder. Increased awareness of validated psychological tools can enhance holistic patient care.