Literature DB >> 19952627

Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction versus complete submuscular coverage: a head-to-head comparison of outcomes.

Hani Sbitany1, Sven N Sandeen, Ashley N Amalfi, Mark S Davenport, Howard N Langstein.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Complete submuscular tissue expander coverage affords the best protection against implant exposure but restricts lower pole expansion. Techniques using acellular dermis as a pectoralis muscle extension can allow for more rapid fill of the expander and better control of the inframammary fold. This study compares both techniques with regard to relevant outcomes.
METHODS: Results of 100 consecutive breast expander reconstructions performed by two surgeons between 2004 and 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, expander coverage type, adjuvant treatment, length and characteristics of the expansion, and incidence and types of complications were analyzed.
RESULTS: One hundred women underwent breast reconstruction with 172 expanders, in 50 using complete submuscular placement and in 50 using partial subpectoral placement with acellular dermis. The patient groups were similar in terms of demographic data. Mean number of fills to complete reconstruction was 4.31 in the submuscular group and 1.72 in the acellular dermis group (p = 0.0001). Mean intraoperative fill volume was 130 cc in the submuscular group, compared with 412 cc per expander in the acellular dermis group (p = 0.0001). Fisher's exact test demonstrated no significant difference in total complication rate between the two groups (14 percent versus 18 percent; p = 0.79).
CONCLUSIONS: Acellular dermis allowed for a greater initial fill of saline. This potentially improves cosmetic outcome, as it better capitalizes on preserved mastectomy skin for reconstruction. The authors conclude that acellular dermis-assisted implant breast reconstruction has a safety profile no worse than that of complete submuscular coverage but offers the benefit of fewer expansions and the potential for more predictable secondary revisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19952627     DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181bf803d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  54 in total

Review 1.  Breast reconstruction: current and future options.

Authors:  Henry Paul; Tahira I Prendergast; Bryson Nicholson; Shenita White; Wayne Ai Frederick
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)       Date:  2011-08-17

2.  Acellular dermal matrices: Use in reconstructive and aesthetic breast surgery.

Authors:  Sheina A Macadam; Peter A Lennox
Journal:  Can J Plast Surg       Date:  2012

Review 3.  Current opinions on indications and algorithms for acellular dermal matrix use in primary prosthetic breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Michael M Vu; John Y S Kim
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-06

Review 4.  The use of acellular dermal matrix in breast reconstruction: evolution of techniques over 2 decades.

Authors:  Ilana G Margulies; C Andrew Salzberg
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-02

5.  Capsular contracture in implant based breast reconstruction-the effect of porcine acellular dermal matrix.

Authors:  Alessia M Lardi; Mark Ho-Asjoe; Klaus Junge; Jian Farhadi
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2017-02

6.  Incidence of Surgical Site Infection Following Mastectomy With and Without Immediate Reconstruction Using Private Insurer Claims Data.

Authors:  Margaret A Olsen; Katelin B Nickel; Ida K Fox; Julie A Margenthaler; Kelly E Ball; Daniel Mines; Anna E Wallace; Victoria J Fraser
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 3.254

7.  Treatment of severe burn with DermACELL(®), an acellular dermal matrix.

Authors:  Shyi-Gen Chen; Yuan-Sheng Tzeng; Chih-Hsin Wang
Journal:  Int J Burns Trauma       Date:  2012-09-15

8.  Acellular Dermal Matrix in Immediate Expander/Implant Breast Reconstruction: A Multicenter Assessment of Risks and Benefits.

Authors:  Michael Sorkin; Ji Qi; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Jeffrey H Kozlow; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 9.  New technologies in breast cancer surgery.

Authors:  Marc Thill; Kristin Baumann
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 2.860

10.  A timesaving technique for shaping of acellular dermal matrix in primary breast reconstruction.

Authors:  K Siddique; I Azmy
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 1.891

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.