BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the impact of collagen matrix in the reconstruction of the diaphragm. METHODS: We queried the electronic medical record for patients who had resection of the diaphragm and simultaneous pulmonary resection between 1999 and 2016. All reconstructions were performed with either polytetrafluoroethylene or acellular dermal matrix. We evaluated the rate of empyema and herniation in each group. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients met inclusion criteria. Polytetrafluoroethylene was used in 168 cases (80.8%) and dermal matrix in 40 cases (19.2%). Dermal matrix was used in 8 extrapleural pneumonectomies (5.4%), in 26 pleurectomy decortications (55.3%), and in 6 other types of resections (40%). Follow-ups were for a median of 15.0 months in the polytetrafluoroethylene group and 11.6 months in the dermal matrix group. Patients in the dermal matrix group had a chest tube for a median of 2.5 days longer than patients with polytetrafluoroethylene (p = 0.006). Empyema occurred in 11 polytetrafluoroethylene reconstructions (6.5%) and 3 dermal matrix reconstructions (7.5%) (p = 0.735). Seven patients (63.6%) with polytetrafluoroethylene infection required removal of the graft, whereas none in the dermal matrix group needed removal (p = 0.351). There were nine herniations in the polytetrafluoroethylene group and four in the dermal matrix group (p = 0.281), all were acute and due to anchorage failure. CONCLUSIONS: Although infection rates were similar between polytetrafluoroethylene and acellular dermal matrix, re-operation for removal was not necessary in the latter. The use of a thick acellular dermal matrix may be a reasonable option when diaphragmatic reconstruction is potentially associated with a higher risk of infection.
BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the impact of collagen matrix in the reconstruction of the diaphragm. METHODS: We queried the electronic medical record for patients who had resection of the diaphragm and simultaneous pulmonary resection between 1999 and 2016. All reconstructions were performed with either polytetrafluoroethylene or acellular dermal matrix. We evaluated the rate of empyema and herniation in each group. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients met inclusion criteria. Polytetrafluoroethylene was used in 168 cases (80.8%) and dermal matrix in 40 cases (19.2%). Dermal matrix was used in 8 extrapleural pneumonectomies (5.4%), in 26 pleurectomy decortications (55.3%), and in 6 other types of resections (40%). Follow-ups were for a median of 15.0 months in the polytetrafluoroethylene group and 11.6 months in the dermal matrix group. Patients in the dermal matrix group had a chest tube for a median of 2.5 days longer than patients with polytetrafluoroethylene (p = 0.006). Empyema occurred in 11 polytetrafluoroethylene reconstructions (6.5%) and 3 dermal matrix reconstructions (7.5%) (p = 0.735). Seven patients (63.6%) with polytetrafluoroethylene infection required removal of the graft, whereas none in the dermal matrix group needed removal (p = 0.351). There were nine herniations in the polytetrafluoroethylene group and four in the dermal matrix group (p = 0.281), all were acute and due to anchorage failure. CONCLUSIONS: Although infection rates were similar between polytetrafluoroethylene and acellular dermal matrix, re-operation for removal was not necessary in the latter. The use of a thick acellular dermal matrix may be a reasonable option when diaphragmatic reconstruction is potentially associated with a higher risk of infection.