About

Brett Thomas Phillips is an Associate Professor of Surgery at Duke University and a member of the Duke Cancer Institute. He is involved in the Integrated Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Residency Program at Duke. His professional role encompasses a focus on plastic, maxillofacial, and oral surgery, contributing to both clinical practice and academic research within the department. His work is situated within the broader context of Duke's surgical divisions and research initiatives, emphasizing advancements in surgical techniques and patient care in his specialty.

Research topics

• Medicine
• Surgery
• Computer Science
• Internal medicine
• Political Science
• Medical education
• Artificial Intelligence
• Sociology
• Family medicine
• Psychology
• Computer Security
• World Wide Web
• General surgery
• Engineering
• Statistics
• Mathematics
• Management
• Physical therapy
• Cardiology
• Radiology
• Anesthesia
• Business
• Combinatorics
• Biology

Selected publications

• Modified V-Y Flap Reconstruction Following Abdominoperineal Resection in Irradiated Patients: Analysis of 10 Years of Experience

  Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open · 2026-04-01

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  Background: Wound complications following primary closure after abdominoperineal resection reach rates of up to 66%. The de-epithelialized V-Y flap has emerged as a common closure technique, particularly in irradiated patients. This study evaluates the 10-year experience of the modified V-Y flap at our institution. Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent de-epithelialized V-Y flap reconstruction for abdominoperineal resection defects between 2013 and 2024 was performed. An analysis of wound complications (eg, infections, dehiscence) and surgical outcomes (eg, reoperations, readmissions) was performed. Multivariate logistic regression assessed the effects of comorbidities and operative factors on wound complications, 30-day reoperations, 30-day readmissions, interventional radiology drainage, and length of stay. Results: Eighty-three patients were included, with a wound complication rate of 30.1%. The most common complication was pelvic fluid collections (22.9%), followed by dehiscence (21.7%). Within 30 days, 6 (7.2%) patients required reoperation, and 13 (15.7%) patients were readmitted. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ( P = 0.046) or atrial fibrillation ( P = 0.048) were more likely to have wound complications. Mesh use (n = 6) was associated with higher wound complications ( P = 0.02), reoperations ( P = 0.03), readmissions ( P < 0.001), and interventional radiology drainage ( P = 0.01). Conclusions: The modified V-Y flap demonstrated improved wound complication with more robust data compared with our prior study. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or atrial fibrillation may face higher risks of wound complications. Mesh use was associated with an increased rate of complications and interventions.

  PublisherDOI

• ASO Visual Abstract: Reducing Plastic Surgery’s Silicone Footprint—Modeling Shipping Costs for Breast Implants and Tissue Expanders

  Annals of Surgical Oncology · 2026-04-07

  articleOpen accessSenior author
  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Reducing Plastic Surgery’s Silicone Footprint: Modeling Shipping Costs for Breast Implants and Tissue Expanders

  Annals of Surgical Oncology · 2026-03-14

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Assessing the Quality of Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Reporting: A 5-Year Scoping Review

  Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2025-04-01 · 1 citations

  articleSenior author

  BACKGROUND: Outcomes reporting is essential to advancing health care quality in plastic surgery and aligns closely with patient satisfaction. At present, there is no widely used set of standards for breast reconstruction reporting in the literature. This study aimed to define how breast reconstruction outcomes are characterized in the literature and identify opportunities to improve consistency across studies. METHODS: All articles published between 2015 and 2021 in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Annals of Plastic Surgery were screened for original articles that pertained to breast reconstruction. Included articles were evaluated using existing outcomes reporting criteria for breast reconstruction that were adapted from general surgery literature. RESULTS: Of 833 breast reconstruction articles reviewed, 192 met inclusion criteria. Approximately one-half of the articles ( n = 87 [45.38%]) pertained to autologous breast reconstruction, 127 (66%) pertained to prosthetic breast reconstruction, and 31 (16.15%) included both procedures. Less than one-fifth of studies ( n = 53 [27.42%]) defined at least half of the complications in their study. Less than one-third included at least half of the suggested procedure-specific complications ( n = 53 [27.42%]), used severity grades ( n = 46 [24.19%]), or considered risk factors in analyses ( n = 64 [33.33%]). Infection was the most reported complication ( n = 120 [62.71%]), and 18 distinct definitions were used. Outcomes reporting criteria assessment revealed the average number of criteria met was 3.3 of a possible 10. CONCLUSIONS: This study found significant gaps in outcomes reporting with regard to study design, complications included, and definitions used. There was little improvement in outcomes reporting from 2015 to 2021 compared with the period from 2000 to 2014. This study supports the need for outcomes reporting standards in breast reconstruction to improve study generalizability and quality.

  PublisherDOI

• Complications and Hardware Failure Following Synthetic Cranioplasty Implants and Free Flap Coverage

  Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery · 2025-07-18 · 1 citations

  articleSenior author

  Background: Composite defects of the scalp and calvarium are complex reconstructive problems. Bony reconstruction is often achieved with synthetic implants, demanding robust soft tissue coverage. In cases where the native scalp has been compromised, free tissue transfer may be indicated. The existing literature on this topic lacks a robust analysis of long-term outcomes and hardware retention rates. The current study is a multi-institutional review of composite calvarial reconstruction with free flap coverage of synthetic cranioplasty implants, focusing specifically on flap selection, long-term outcomes, hardware extrusion, and explantation rates. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted at two high-volume institutions for patients who had undergone cranioplasty and free tissue transfer between 2001 and 2022. Patient demographics and comorbidities, reconstructive indications, cranioplasty material, flap type, and complications within a 90-day period were collected. Implant exposure and explantation data were collected through follow-up. Results: A total of 42 patients were identified with an average age of 59 years (SD 14.9). Prior scalp radiation was present in 54.7% of cases. Cranioplasty was most commonly indicated after tumor extirpation (88.0%), with titanium mesh as the most common material utilized (64.3%). The most commonly used free flaps were latissimus (45.2%), anterolateral thigh (ALT) (16.7%), and radial forearm (16.7%). The most common recipient vessels were the superficial temporal (64.2%), facial (21.4%), and superior thyroid (9.5%). Flap compromise requiring return to the operating room occurred in two patients (4.8%) and partial flap loss occurred in three patients (7.14%). Surgical complications occurred in 60% of cases with wound complications (33.3%) and surgical site infection (28.6%) being the most common. Implant extrusion occurred in 31% of cases at an average of 7.9 months (SD 30.1) after definitive reconstruction, and explantation was required in 42.9% of cases at an average of 12.8 months (SD 33.6). The average total length of follow-up was 27.1 months. Conclusion: This multi-institutional analysis found that patients who undergo composite cranial vault reconstruction and free flap coverage experience high rates of surgical complications, and over one-third of these patients experience implant extrusion or explantation. Although no individual patient-related risk factor was independently associated with increased complication rates, our findings suggest that flap composition and timing of reconstruction may influence hardware retention and should be carefully considered during preoperative planning.

  PublisherDOI

• ASO Visual Abstract: Short-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Bilateral Risk-Reducing Mastectomy for Patients at High Risk for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

  Annals of Surgical Oncology · 2025-01-23

  review
  PublisherDOI

• Evaluation of Geographic Trends in Plastic Surgery Telemedicine Utilization

  Journal of Surgical Research · 2025-07-30

  article
  PublisherDOI

• Spotlight in Plastic Surgery: January 2026

  Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2025-09-22

  article1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Race and Gender Bias in Narrative Letters of Recommendation for Plastic Surgery Residency Applicants

  Journal of Surgical Research · 2025-01-07 · 5 citations

  article
  PublisherDOI

• “Verifying Predictive Models for Determining Final Implant Volume in Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction”

  Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2025-10-30

  articleSenior author

  BACKGROUND: Most breast reconstructions following mastectomy utilize a two-stage tissue expander (TE) to implant approach. Prior studies on prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstructions have identified formulas for predicting final implant size using TE size and final fill. The aim of this study is to test the accuracy of these models. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients that underwent two-stage TE to implant breast reconstruction within the Duke University Health System between 2021 and 2024 was performed. Demographic, oncologic, and reconstructive data were collected. The equations 26.6 + 0.38*(TE final fill) + 0.61*(TE size) for prepectoral and 71.7 + 0.8*(TE final fill) + 0.1*(TE size) for subpectoral reconstructions were used to calculate predicted implant sizes, which were then compared to actual implant sizes. RESULTS: 70 prepectoral patients (117 breasts) and 39 subpectoral patients (67 breasts) met criteria for inclusion. All patients had at least 5 months of postoperative follow-up. The mean predicted implant size was 23cc less than the mean actual size (477 vs. 500cc). The root-mean-square errors (RMSEs) for prepectoral and subpectoral reconstructions were 73.6 and 54.9cc, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In general, both models underpredicted final implant size. Depending on the implant profile, a 55-75cc difference equates to the models being accurate within 3-4 sizes for prepectoral and 2-3 sizes for subpectoral reconstructions, suggesting their potential use as a starting point to guide surgeon decision-making. Being able to predict final implant size more accurately will optimize surgical planning, decrease the number of implants ordered for each case, and reduce costs.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Ronnie L. Shammas

  Duke University

  208 shared

• Scott T. Hollenbeck

  Duke Medical Center

  186 shared

• Amanda R. Sergesketter

  Duke Medical Center

  140 shared

• Rachel A. Greenup

  Yale Cancer Center

  134 shared

• Caitlin E. Marks

  Washington University in St. Louis

  68 shared

• Gloria Broadwater

  Duke Medical Center

  68 shared

• Jennifer K. Plichta

  Durham University

  66 shared

• Sharon Clancy

  Duke University Hospital

  65 shared