Literature DB >> 30308615

Implant Based Breast Reconstruction With Acellular Dermal Matrix: Safety Data From an Open-label, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial in the Setting of Breast Cancer Treatment.

Fredrik Lohmander1,2, Jakob Lagergren2,3, Pankaj G Roy4, Hemming Johansson5, Yvonne Brandberg5, Catharina Eriksen6, Jan Frisell2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical outcomes of using acellular dermal matrix (ADM) with implant based breast reconstructions (IBBRs) in a randomized controlled trial. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The use of ADMs in IBBRs is widespread, but link between ADM and complications remain a controversial topic. In view of reports concerning harm, we present 6-months safety data of ADM-assisted IBBR in the setting of breast cancer treatment.
METHODS: An open-label, randomized, controlled trial recruiting patients from 4 centers in Sweden and 1 in UK. Eligible were women with breast cancer planned for mastectomy with immediate IBBR. Participants were randomly allocated to IBBR with or without ADM (Strattice, Branchburg, NJ), with stratification by center in blocks of 6. Main primary endpoint was number of unplanned reoperations at 24 months, and safety expressed as the incidence of adverse events with a 6-month follow-up time for all participants. Analysis were done per protocol using Fisher exact test for complications and reoperations.
RESULTS: From start of enrolment on April 24, 2014, to close of trial on May 10, 2017, 135 women were enrolled, of whom 64 with ADM and 65 without ADM were included in the final analysis. Four patients (6%) in each group had reconstructive failure with implant loss, but IBBR with ADM exhibited a trend of more overall complications and reoperations (difference 0·16, 95% CI, -0·01 to 0·32, P = 0·070), and with higher risk of wound healing problems (P = 0·013).
CONCLUSIONS: With 6-months follow-up for all participants, immediate IBBR with ADM carried a risk of implant loss equal to conventional IBBR without ADM, but was associated with more adverse outcomes requiring surgical intervention. Further investigation of risk factors and patient selection in a long-term follow-up is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30308615     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  12 in total

1.  Breast reconstruction using a laparoscopically harvested pedicled omental flap after endoscopic mastectomy for patients with breast cancer: an observational study of a minimally invasive method.

Authors:  Zi-Han Wang; Pei Xin; Xiang Qu; Zhong-Tao Zhang
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-06

2.  The Prepectoral, Hybrid Breast Reconstruction: The Synergy of Lipofilling and Breast Implants.

Authors:  Filip B J L Stillaert; Bernd Lannau; Koenraad Van Landuyt; Phillip N Blondeel
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2020-07-23

3.  One for two, ipsilateral reduction and contralateral reconstruction mammoplasty: A case report.

Authors:  Abdulwahid M Salih; Zuhair D Hammood; Fahmi H Kakamad; Karzan M Salih; Hiwa O Baba; Hunar A Hassan; Shvan H Mohammed; Goran A Qadir; Hemn A Hassan; Ismael Y Abdullah
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2020-06-22

4.  Acellular Dermal Matrix Sterility: Does It Affect Microbial and Clinical Outcomes Following Implantation?

Authors:  Gabriel M Klein; Gurtej Singh; Jocellie Marquez; Matthew Gebre; Robert Barry; Tara L Huston; Jason C Ganz; Sami U Khan; Alexander B Dagum; Duc T Bui
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2019-08-08

5.  Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study.

Authors:  Gareth Davies; Nicola Mills; Chris Holcombe; Shelley Potter
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  Considerations for patient selection: Prepectoral versus subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Jun Young Yang; Chan Woo Kim; Jang Won Lee; Seung Ki Kim; Seung Ah Lee; Euna Hwang
Journal:  Arch Plast Surg       Date:  2019-11-15

Review 7.  Submuscular and Pre-Pectoral ADM Assisted Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Roberto Cuomo
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 2.430

8.  The Use of Absorbable Mesh in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A 7-Year Review.

Authors:  Heather R Faulkner; Lauren Shikowitz-Behr; Matthew McLeod; Eric Wright; John Hulsen; William G Austen
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 5.169

9.  Quality of life and patient satisfaction after implant-based breast reconstruction with or without acellular dermal matrix: randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  F Lohmander; J Lagergren; H Johansson; P G Roy; J Frisell; Y Brandberg
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2020-08-06

10.  First-year complications after immediate breast reconstruction with a biological and a synthetic mesh in the same patient: A randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Emma Hansson; Ann-Chatrin Edvinsson; Anna Elander; Lars Kölby; Håkan Hallberg
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-10-13       Impact factor: 3.454

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.