S Potter1, A Chambers2, S Govindajulu2, A Sahu2, R Warr3, S Cawthorn4. 1. Centre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom. 2. Breast Care Centre, North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Road, Bristol BS10 5NB, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Plastic Surgery, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom. 4. Breast Care Centre, North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Road, Bristol BS10 5NB, United Kingdom. Electronic address: simon.cawthorn@nbt.nhs.uk.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) may improve outcomes in implant-based breast reconstruction, but recent evidence suggests complication rates may be higher when ADM is used. We retrospectively compared early complications and implant loss in implant-based breast reconstruction (BR) with and without ADM to evaluate the safety of the procedure in our centre. METHODS: Case-notes of consecutive women undergoing implant-based BR from May 2011 to November 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Data were extracted using a standardised pro-forma and the rate of early complications, major complications and implant loss compared between procedure groups. RESULTS: Forty-six implant-based reconstructions were performed for malignancy (n = 31, 67.4%) or prophylaxis (n = 15, 32.6%) in 31 women over the 18-month study period. ADM (Tecnoss Protexa(®), Tecnoss S.r.l.) was used in 31 (67.4%) cases. There were no differences in patient age, BMI, co-morbidities, smoking or chemotherapy between groups, but patients receiving ADM were more likely to have received radiotherapy prior to their reconstruction (n = 6, 30% vs. n = 0, 0%, p = 0.043). The overall rate of early complications was 26.1% (n = 12) but there was no significant difference between procedure groups (standard-n = 4, 27.7% vs. ADM-n = 8, 25.8%; p = 0.950). There were 2 (4.3%) major complications none of which were associated with ADM use (standard-n = 2, 13.3% vs. ADM-n = 0, 0.0%; p = 0.038). There were 6 (13.0%) implant losses of which 4 were in the ADM group (standard-n = 2, 13.3% vs. ADM-n = 4, 12.9%; p = 0.968). All of these were associated with pre-reconstruction radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: ADM-assisted implant-based reconstruction with Tecnoss Protexa(®) is safe and may improve outcomes for women by facilitating a single-stage procedure. Robust prospective evaluation is now needed to definitively evaluate the role of ADM in implant-based BR.
INTRODUCTION: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) may improve outcomes in implant-based breast reconstruction, but recent evidence suggests complication rates may be higher when ADM is used. We retrospectively compared early complications and implant loss in implant-based breast reconstruction (BR) with and without ADM to evaluate the safety of the procedure in our centre. METHODS: Case-notes of consecutive women undergoing implant-based BR from May 2011 to November 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Data were extracted using a standardised pro-forma and the rate of early complications, major complications and implant loss compared between procedure groups. RESULTS: Forty-six implant-based reconstructions were performed for malignancy (n = 31, 67.4%) or prophylaxis (n = 15, 32.6%) in 31 women over the 18-month study period. ADM (Tecnoss Protexa(®), Tecnoss S.r.l.) was used in 31 (67.4%) cases. There were no differences in patient age, BMI, co-morbidities, smoking or chemotherapy between groups, but patients receiving ADM were more likely to have received radiotherapy prior to their reconstruction (n = 6, 30% vs. n = 0, 0%, p = 0.043). The overall rate of early complications was 26.1% (n = 12) but there was no significant difference between procedure groups (standard-n = 4, 27.7% vs. ADM-n = 8, 25.8%; p = 0.950). There were 2 (4.3%) major complications none of which were associated with ADM use (standard-n = 2, 13.3% vs. ADM-n = 0, 0.0%; p = 0.038). There were 6 (13.0%) implant losses of which 4 were in the ADM group (standard-n = 2, 13.3% vs. ADM-n = 4, 12.9%; p = 0.968). All of these were associated with pre-reconstruction radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: ADM-assisted implant-based reconstruction with Tecnoss Protexa(®) is safe and may improve outcomes for women by facilitating a single-stage procedure. Robust prospective evaluation is now needed to definitively evaluate the role of ADM in implant-based BR.
Authors: Oscar J Manrique; Ali Charafeddine; Amjed Abu-Ghname; Joseph Banuelos; Steven R Jacobson; Jorys Martinez-Jorge; Minh-Doan Nguyen; Christin Harless; Nho V Tran; Basel Sharaf; James W Jakub; Tina J Hieken; Amy C Degnim; Judy C Boughey Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 2.430
Authors: Shelley Potter; Elizabeth J Conroy; Paula R Williamson; Steven Thrush; Lisa J Whisker; Joanna M Skillman; Nicola L P Barnes; Ramsey I Cutress; Elizabeth M Teasdale; Nicola Mills; Senthurun Mylvaganam; Olivier A Branford; Katherina McEvoy; Abhilash Jain; Matthew D Gardiner; Jane M Blazeby; Christopher Holcombe Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2016-08-04