Colleen M McCarthy1, Clara N Lee, Eric G Halvorson, Elyn Riedel, Andrea L Pusic, Babak J Mehrara, Joseph J Disa. 1. New York, N.Y.; and Chapel Hill, N.C. From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, and the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, and the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current efficacy data supporting the routine use of acellular dermal matrices in postmastectomy tissue expander/implant reconstruction are limited. A multicenter, blinded, randomized controlled study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix in the setting of tissue expander/implant reconstruction. The primary objective of the study was to determine whether the use of matrix would decrease patient-reported postoperative pain. The secondary objective was to determine whether its use would accelerate the rate of postoperative expansion. METHODS: The randomized controlled trial was conducted at two U.S. centers from 2008 to 2011. Immediately following mastectomy, all patients were randomized to one of two treatment arms: (1) acellular dermal matrix-assisted, tissue expander/implant reconstruction; and (2) submuscular tissue expander/implant placement. All patients were blinded to their treatment arm. RESULTS:One hundred eight consented to participate; 38 were excluded prior to randomization. In total, 70 patients were randomized. There were no differences seen in immediate postoperative pain (p = 0.19) or pain during the expansion phase (p = 0.65) between treatment arms. There was similarly no difference in postoperative narcotic use (p = 0.38). The rate of postoperative expansion did not differ between groups (p = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the use of acellular dermal matrix in the setting of tissue expander/implant reconstruction neither reduces postoperative pain nor accelerates the rate of postoperative expansion. An examination of its efficacy in improving long-term outcomes following tissue expander/implant reconstruction is warranted.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Current efficacy data supporting the routine use of acellular dermal matrices in postmastectomy tissue expander/implant reconstruction are limited. A multicenter, blinded, randomized controlled study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix in the setting of tissue expander/implant reconstruction. The primary objective of the study was to determine whether the use of matrix would decrease patient-reported postoperative pain. The secondary objective was to determine whether its use would accelerate the rate of postoperative expansion. METHODS: The randomized controlled trial was conducted at two U.S. centers from 2008 to 2011. Immediately following mastectomy, all patients were randomized to one of two treatment arms: (1) acellular dermal matrix-assisted, tissue expander/implant reconstruction; and (2) submuscular tissue expander/implant placement. All patients were blinded to their treatment arm. RESULTS: One hundred eight consented to participate; 38 were excluded prior to randomization. In total, 70 patients were randomized. There were no differences seen in immediate postoperative pain (p = 0.19) or pain during the expansion phase (p = 0.65) between treatment arms. There was similarly no difference in postoperative narcotic use (p = 0.38). The rate of postoperative expansion did not differ between groups (p = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the use of acellular dermal matrix in the setting of tissue expander/implant reconstruction neither reduces postoperative pain nor accelerates the rate of postoperative expansion. An examination of its efficacy in improving long-term outcomes following tissue expander/implant reconstruction is warranted.
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
Authors: Miguel S Cabalag; Marie Rostek; George S Miller; Michael P Chae; Tam Quinn; Warren M Rozen; David J Hunter-Smith Journal: Gland Surg Date: 2016-04
Authors: Paula R Gravina; Rowland W Pettit; Matthew J Davis; Sebastian J Winocour; Jesse C Selber Journal: Semin Plast Surg Date: 2019-10-17 Impact factor: 2.314
Authors: Jaime A Cavallo; Noopur Gangopadhyay; Jason Dudas; Andres A Roma; Mateusz S Jasielec; Jack Baty; Sara Baalman; Margaret M Frisella; Marissa M Tenenbaum; Terence M Myckatyn; Brent D Matthews; Corey R Deeken Journal: Ann Plast Surg Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 1.539
Authors: Jonas A Nelson; Meghana G Shamsunder; Joshua Vorstenbosch; Thais O Polanco; Evan Matros; Michelle R Coriddi; Babak J Mehrara; Robert J Allen; Joseph H Dayan; Joseph J Disa Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 5.169
Authors: Jordan D Frey; Michael Alperovich; Katie E Weichman; Stelios C Wilson; Alexes Hazen; Pierre B Saadeh; Jamie P Levine; Mihye Choi; Nolan S Karp Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2015-09-04