Harvard Catalyst Profiles

Contact, publication, and social network information about Harvard faculty and fellows.

Bernard Travis Lee, M.D.

Co-Author

This page shows the publications co-authored by Bernard Lee and Adam Tobias.
Connection Strength

8.679
  1. A new classification system for muscle and nerve preservation in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2010; 30(2):85-90.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.426
  2. Computer-based learning module increases shared decision making in breast reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Mar; 17(3):738-43.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.426
  3. Analysis of Utility Assessment Scores to Objectify the Health Burden Caused by Breast Conservation Therapy. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2020 May; 28(2):77-82.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.219
  4. Safety Profiles of Fat Processing Techniques in Autologous Fat Transfer for Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Apr; 143(4):985-991.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.202
  5. Reconstruction of Mohs Defects Located in the Head and Neck. J Craniofac Surg. 2019 Mar/Apr; 30(2):412-417.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.201
  6. Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction in Women With Previous Abdominal Incisions: A Comparison of Complication Rates. Ann Plast Surg. 2018 11; 81(5):560-564.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.196
  7. Does Hormone Therapy Use Increase Perioperative Complications in Abdominally Based Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 06; 141(6):805e-813e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.191
  8. Topical nitroglycerin for the treatment of intraoperative microsurgical vasospasm. Microsurgery. 2018 Jul; 38(5):524-529.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.186
  9. Evaluating the Use of Tissue Oximetry to Decrease Intensive Unit Monitoring for Free Flap Breast Reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2017 Jul; 79(1):42-46.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.179
  10. Medial Row Perforators Are Associated with Higher Rates of Fat Necrosis in Bilateral DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Jul; 140(1):19-24.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.179
  11. The accessibility, readability, and quality of online resources for gender affirming surgery. J Surg Res. 2017 09; 217:198-206.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.177
  12. Umbilical necrosis rates after abdominal-based microsurgical breast reconstruction. J Surg Res. 2017 07; 215:257-263.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.177
  13. Preoperative CT-angiography in autologous breast reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2016 Nov; 36(8):623-627.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.165
  14. A Novel Free Flap Monitoring System Using Tissue Oximetry with Text Message Alerts. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2016 Jun; 32(5):415-20.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.165
  15. Does Increased Experience with Tissue Oximetry Monitoring in Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction Lead to Decreased Flap Loss? The Learning Effect. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Apr; 137(4):1093-1101.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.164
  16. Mastectomy skin necrosis after microsurgical breast reconstruction. J Surg Res. 2015 Oct; 198(2):530-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.153
  17. Tumescent mastectomy technique in autologous breast reconstruction. J Surg Res. 2015 Oct; 198(2):525-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.153
  18. Patient preferences in access to breast reconstruction. J Surg Res. 2015 May 15; 195(2):412-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.152
  19. A novel pilot study using spatial frequency domain imaging to assess oxygenation of perforator flaps during reconstructive breast surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 2013 Sep; 71(3):308-15.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.137
  20. Patient involvement in the decision-making process improves satisfaction and quality of life in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. J Surg Res. 2013 Sep; 184(1):665-70.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.134
  21. Functional MRI to evaluate "sense of self" following perforator flap breast reconstruction. PLoS One. 2012; 7(11):e49883.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.130
  22. Cost analysis of implant-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix. Ann Plast Surg. 2012 Nov; 69(5):516-20.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.130
  23. Intramuscular perforator dissection with the hydrodissection technique. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2013 Jan; 29(1):45-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.129
  24. The impact of nipple reconstruction on patient satisfaction in breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012 Oct; 69(4):389-93.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.129
  25. Delayed autologous breast reconstruction after postmastectomy radiation therapy: is there an optimal time? Ann Plast Surg. 2012 Jul; 69(1):14-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.127
  26. Analysis of complications and patient satisfaction in pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous and deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012 Jul; 69(1):19-23.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.127
  27. Early experience with barbed sutures for abdominal closure in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction. Eplasty. 2012; 12:e24.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.126
  28. High body mass index and smoking predict morbidity in breast cancer surgery: a multivariate analysis of 26,988 patients from the national surgical quality improvement program database. Ann Surg. 2012 Mar; 255(3):551-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.124
  29. The lateral chest wall: a separate aesthetic unit in breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Dec; 128(6):626e-634e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.122
  30. Evaluation of clinical outcomes and aesthetic results after autologous fat grafting for contour deformities of the reconstructed breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Nov; 128(5):411e-418e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.121
  31. An analysis of delayed breast reconstruction outcomes as recorded in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012 Mar; 65(3):289-94.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.121
  32. Immediate microsurgical breast reconstruction and simultaneous sentinel lymph node dissection: issues with node positivity and recipient vessel selection. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2011 Sep; 27(7):445-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.118
  33. Bilateral autologous reconstruction from different sites: indications and outcomes after DIEP and SGAP flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jun; 127(6):151e-153e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.117
  34. Postmastectomy breast reconstruction after previous lumpectomy and radiation therapy: analysis of complications and satisfaction. Ann Plast Surg. 2011 May; 66(5):444-51.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.117
  35. Breast cancer recurrence following postmastectomy reconstruction compared to mastectomy with no reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2011 May; 66(5):466-71.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.117
  36. Patient satisfaction in unilateral and bilateral breast reconstruction [outcomes article]. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Apr; 127(4):1417-1424.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.116
  37. Impact of complications on patient satisfaction in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Apr; 127(4):1428-1436.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.116
  38. Tissue oximetry monitoring in microsurgical breast reconstruction decreases flap loss and improves rate of flap salvage. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Mar; 127(3):1080-1085.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.115
  39. Postoperative Pain Management in DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction: Identification of Patients With Poor Pain Control. Eplasty. 2010 Sep 15; 10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.112
  40. Early results using ultrasound-assisted liposuction as a treatment for fat necrosis in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Sep; 126(3):762-768.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.112
  41. Effects of vasopressor administration on the outcomes of microsurgical breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2010 Jul; 65(1):28-31.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.110
  42. Infectious Complications Leading to Explantation in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction With AlloDerm. Eplasty. 2010 Jun 30; 10:e48.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.110
  43. Pyoderma gangrenosum following bilateral deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010 Sep; 26(7):475-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.110
  44. Patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparative evaluation of DIEP, TRAM, latissimus flap, and implant techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Jun; 125(6):1585-1595.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.110
  45. Postmastectomy radiation therapy and breast reconstruction: an analysis of complications and patient satisfaction. Ann Plast Surg. 2010 May; 64(5):679-83.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.109
  46. Sociodemographics, referral patterns, and Internet use for decision-making in microsurgical breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Apr; 125(4):1087-1094.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.108
  47. Establishment of perforator flap programs for breast reconstruction: the New England program experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Nov; 124(5):1410-1418.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.105
  48. Impact of regional referral centers for microsurgical breast reconstruction: the New England perforator flap program experience. J Am Coll Surg. 2009 Feb; 208(2):246-54.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.100
  49. Design and impact of an intraoperative pathway: a new operating room model for team-based practice. J Am Coll Surg. 2008 Dec; 207(6):865-73.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.098
  50. The Maylard incision: a low transverse incision variant seen in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009 Nov; 62(11):e447-52.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.098
  51. Ultrasound-assisted liposuction as a treatment of fat necrosis after deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction: a case report. Ann Plast Surg. 2008 Jun; 60(6):614-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.095
  52. Paradoxical venous Doppler signal: a sentinel sign of early venous congestion. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2008 May; 24(4):255-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.095
  53. DIEP flaps in women with abdominal scars: are complication rates affected? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 May; 121(5):1527-1531.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.095
  54. The rib-sparing technique for internal mammary vessel exposure in microsurgical breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2008 Mar; 60(3):241-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.094
  55. Autologous fat grafting: a technique for stabilization of the microvascular pedicle in DIEP flap reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2008; 28(7):495-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.093
  56. A single-cell atlas of human and mouse white adipose tissue. Nature. 2022 Mar; 603(7903):926-933.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.062
  57. Role of CTA in Women with Abdominal Scars Undergoing DIEP Breast Reconstruction: Review of 1,187 Flaps. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2020 May; 36(4):294-300.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.054
  58. Referrals of Plastic Surgery Patients to Integrative Medicine Centers: A Review of Resource Utility. Ann Plast Surg. 2019 07; 83(1):3-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  59. Integrative Medicine in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Our Literature. Ann Plast Surg. 2019 04; 82(4):459-468.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  60. Gender Affirmation Surgery: A Synopsis Using American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program and National Inpatient Sample Databases. Ann Plast Surg. 2018 04; 80(4 Suppl 4):S229-S235.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  61. Surgical site infection in immediate breast reconstruction: Does chemotherapy timing make a difference? J Surg Oncol. 2018 Jun; 117(7):1440-1446.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  62. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 30-Day Challenge: Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Reporting Reliability. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2018 Mar; 6(3):e1643.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  63. Prospective, Double-Blind Evaluation of Umbilicoplasty Techniques Using Conventional and Crowdsourcing Methods. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Dec; 140(6):1151-1162.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  64. Comparison of risk factors and complications in patients by stratified mastectomy weight: An institutional review of 1041 consecutive cases. J Surg Oncol. 2017 Dec; 116(7):811-818.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.045
  65. Comparing the Outcomes of Different Agents to Treat Vasospasm at Microsurgical Anastomosis during the Papaverine Shortage. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Sep; 138(3):401e-408e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.042
  66. Nipple-areolar Complex Reconstruction following Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Utility Assessment Study. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Apr; 3(4):e380.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.039
  67. Does acellular dermal matrix really improve aesthetic outcome in tissue expander/implant-based breast reconstruction? Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2015 Jun; 39(3):359-68.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  68. Are patients with low body mass index candidates for deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps for unilateral breast reconstruction? Microsurgery. 2015 Sep; 35(6):421-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  69. Living with a unilateral mastectomy defect: a utility assessment and outcomes study. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2014 Jun; 30(5):313-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  70. Common patterns of reconstruction for Mohs defects in the head and neck. J Craniofac Surg. 2014 Jan; 25(1):87-92.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  71. The Boston marathon bombings: the early plastic surgery experience of one Boston hospital. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Nov; 132(5):1351-1363.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  72. First-in-human pilot study of a spatial frequency domain oxygenation imaging system. J Biomed Opt. 2011 Aug; 16(8):086015.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
Connection Strength
The connection strength for co-authors is the sum of the scores for each of their shared publications.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.
Funded by the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences through its Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program, grant number UL1TR002541.