Brett Phillips

Positions:

Assistant Professor of Surgery

Surgery, Plastic, Maxillofacial, and Oral Surgery
School of Medicine

Member of the Duke Cancer Institute

Duke Cancer Institute
School of Medicine

Education:

B.A. 2003

New York University

M.D. 2007

Stony Brook University, Renaissance School of Medicine

M.B.A. 2011

State University of New York, Stony Brook

General Surgery Resident, Surgery

Stony Brook University, Renaissance School of Medicine

Research Fellow, Surgery

Stony Brook University, Renaissance School of Medicine

General Surgery Resident, Surgery

Stony Brook University, Renaissance School of Medicine

Plastic Surgery Resident, Surgery

Duke University School of Medicine

Microvascular Reconstructive Surgery, Surgery

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Grants:

A Multi-institutional Randomized Controlled Trial to Determine the Optimal Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Tissue Expander-based Breast Reconstruction

Administered By
Surgery, Plastic, Maxillofacial, and Oral Surgery
Awarded By
The Plastic Surgery Foundation
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

A Single Arm, Prospective, Open Label, Single Center Study to Evaluate the SPY PHI Fluorescence Imaging Assessment Software and Determine the Effectiveness of Intraoperative Perfusion Assessment and Identification of Viable and Non-Viable Tissue duri

Administered By
Surgery, Plastic, Maxillofacial, and Oral Surgery
Awarded By
Stryker Corporation
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

Publications:

Dissatisfaction After Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Breast reconstruction is associated with improved patient well-being after mastectomy; however, factors that contribute to post-surgical dissatisfaction remain poorly characterized. METHODS: Adult women who underwent post-mastectomy implant-based or autologous breast reconstruction between 2015 and 2019 were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews regarding their lived experiences with reconstructive care. Participants completed the BREAST-Q, and tabulated scores were used to dichotomize patient-reported outcomes as satisfied or dissatisfied (high or low) for each BREAST-Q domain. A convergent mixed-methods analysis was used to evaluate interviews for content related to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with breast reconstruction. RESULTS: Overall, we interviewed 21 women and identified 17 subcodes that corresponded with the five BREAST-Q domains. Sources of dissatisfaction were found to be related to the following domains: (a) low breast satisfaction due to asymmetry, cup size, and lack of sensation and physical feeling (n = 8, 38%); (b) poor sexual well-being due to shape, look and feel (n = 7, 78% [of 9 who discussed sexual well-being]); (c) reduced physical well-being of the chest due to persistent pain and weakness (n = 11, 52%); (d) reduced abdominal well-being due to changes in abdominal strength, numbness, and posture (n = 6, 38% [of 16 who underwent abdominally based reconstruction]); and (e) low psychosocial well-being impacted by an unexpected appearance that negatively influenced self-confidence and self-identity (n = 13, 62%). CONCLUSION: Patients may be unprepared for the physical, sexual, and psychosocial outcomes of breast reconstruction. Targeted strategies to improve preoperative education and shared decision making are needed to mitigate unexpectedness associated with breast reconstruction and related outcomes.
Authors
Shammas, RL; Fish, LJ; Sergesketter, AR; Offodile, AC; Phillips, BT; Oshima, S; Lee, CN; Hollenbeck, ST; Greenup, RA
MLA Citation
Shammas, Ronnie L., et al. “Dissatisfaction After Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Mixed-Methods Study.Ann Surg Oncol, Aug. 2021. Pubmed, doi:10.1245/s10434-021-10720-9.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1496049
PMID
34460034
Source
pubmed
Published In
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published Date
DOI
10.1245/s10434-021-10720-9

Spotlight in Plastic Surgery: October 2020.

Authors
Phillips, BT; Asaad, M; Cho, DY; Kania, K; Kearney, AM; Khajuria, A; Nash, DW; Sergesketter, AR; Siotos, C; Tevlin, R; Gosain, AK
MLA Citation
Phillips, Brett T., et al. “Spotlight in Plastic Surgery: October 2020.Plast Reconstr Surg, vol. 146, no. 4, Oct. 2020, pp. 941–44. Pubmed, doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000007224.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1482107
PMID
33950902
Source
pubmed
Published In
Plast Reconstr Surg
Volume
146
Published Date
Start Page
941
End Page
944
DOI
10.1097/PRS.0000000000007224

Assessing the Influence of Failed Implant Reconstruction on Patient Satisfaction and Decision Regret after Salvage Free-Flap Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND:  Free-flap breast reconstruction after failed implant reconstruction is associated with improved patient outcomes. How the level of satisfaction achieved compares between patients with and without previously failed implant reconstruction remains unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of prior failed implant-based reconstruction on long-term patient-reported outcomes after free-flap breast reconstruction. METHODS:  All patients undergoing free-flap breast reconstruction between 2015 and 2019 were identified. Patient satisfaction using the BREAST-Q and decisional regret using the Decision Regret Scale were compared between patients with and without a history of implant breast reconstruction. RESULTS:  Overall, 207 patients were contacted and 131 completed the BREAST-Q and Decision Regret Scale. A total of 23 patients had a history of failed implant-based reconstruction requiring free-flap-flap salvage, most commonly due to infection (39.1%), chronic pain (34.8%), capsular contracture (26%), and implant malposition (26.1%). Following definitive free-flap reconstruction, patients with prior failed implant reconstruction had significantly lower BREAST-Q scores for satisfaction with breast (61.2 ± 16.7 vs. 70.4 ± 18.7; p = 0.04) and sexual well-being (38.5 ± 18.2 vs. 52.8 ± 24.7; p = 0.01) and reported higher decision regret (19.1 ± 18.6 vs. 9.6 ± 15.6, respectively). There were no significant differences for psychosocial well-being (p = 0.67), physical well-being (chest; p = 0.27), and physical well-being (abdomen; p = 0.91). CONCLUSION:  A history of failed implant-based reconstruction is associated with reduced satisfaction and increased decision regret with the final reconstructive outcome. This data underscores the importance of appropriate patient selection at the initial consultation, and informed preoperative counseling regarding long-term outcomes in patients presenting for free-flap reconstruction after a failed implant-based reconstruction.
Authors
Shammas, RL; Sergesketter, AR; Taskindoust, M; Biswas, S; Hollenbeck, ST; Phillips, BT
MLA Citation
Shammas, Ronnie L., et al. “Assessing the Influence of Failed Implant Reconstruction on Patient Satisfaction and Decision Regret after Salvage Free-Flap Breast Reconstruction.J Reconstr Microsurg, Aug. 2021. Pubmed, doi:10.1055/s-0041-1735224.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1494624
PMID
34425595
Source
pubmed
Published In
Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery
Published Date
DOI
10.1055/s-0041-1735224

Assessment of Plastic Surgery Residency Applications without United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Scores.

SUMMARY: The United States Medical Licensing Examination announced the changing of Step 1 score reporting from a three-digit number to pass/fail beginning on January 1, 2022. Plastic surgery residency programs have traditionally used United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scores to compare plastic surgery residency applicants. Without a numerical score, the plastic surgery residency application review process will likely change. This article discusses advantages, disadvantages, and steps forward for residency programs related to the upcoming change. The authors encourage programs to continue to seek innovative methods of objectively and holistically evaluating applications.
Authors
Irwin, TJ; Friedrich, JB; Nguyen, VT; Ko, JH; Phillips, BT; Eberlin, KR
MLA Citation
Irwin, Timothy J., et al. “Assessment of Plastic Surgery Residency Applications without United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Scores.Plast Reconstr Surg, vol. 148, no. 1, July 2021, pp. 219–23. Pubmed, doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000008057.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1489347
PMID
34076626
Source
pubmed
Published In
Plast Reconstr Surg
Volume
148
Published Date
Start Page
219
End Page
223
DOI
10.1097/PRS.0000000000008057

The Association between Away Rotations and Rank Order in the Integrated Plastic Surgery Match.

BACKGROUND: Given the competition in the integrated plastic surgery Match, away rotations are ubiquitous among plastic surgery applicants to differentiate their applications. This study aimed to characterize how performing an away rotation affects rank order and Match outcomes for integrated plastic surgery programs. METHODS: An online survey was designed and distributed to the top 25 integrated plastic surgery programs in the United States as determined by Doximity. Programs were polled about away rotation structure, position of rotators on their 2018 to 2019 rank list, and composition of current resident classes. RESULTS: Twenty-five programs completed the survey (response rate, 100 percent). On average, programs interviewed 34.9 applicants (range, 22 to 50 applicants) and ranked 32.8 applicants (range, 10 to 50 applicants). Most "ranked-to-match" positions were occupied by home students or away rotators (60.9 percent). Rank order of home students, away rotators, and nonrotators varied significantly (p < 0.001), with median rank order of home students [5 (interquartile range, 1 to 9)] and rotators [14 (interquartile range, 6 to 27)] higher than nonrotators [17 (interquartile range, 10 to 29)]. Rank orders of away rotators tended to follow a bimodal distribution. Furthermore, 64.4 percent of integrated residents were either a home student or away rotator at their matched integrated program, with 20 percent of residency programs composed of greater than 70 percent of away rotators/home students across postgraduate years 1 through 6 classes. CONCLUSIONS: For integrated plastic surgery programs, the majority of ranked-to-match students on rank lists and current residents were either home students or away rotators at their respective program. Performing well on an away rotation appears to confer significant benefit to the applicant applying in the integrated plastic surgery Match.
Authors
Sergesketter, AR; Glener, AD; Shammas, RL; Nguyen, VT; Ko, JH; Lifchez, SD; Momoh, AO; Marcus, JR; Hollenbeck, ST; Phillips, BT
MLA Citation
Sergesketter, Amanda R., et al. “The Association between Away Rotations and Rank Order in the Integrated Plastic Surgery Match.Plast Reconstr Surg, vol. 147, no. 6, June 2021, pp. 1050e-1056e. Pubmed, doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000007984.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1482039
PMID
33973940
Source
pubmed
Published In
Plast Reconstr Surg
Volume
147
Published Date
Start Page
1050e
End Page
1056e
DOI
10.1097/PRS.0000000000007984