Peng Gao1, Xiangyu Wang2, Ping Bai1, Xiangyi Kong1, Zhongzhao Wang3, Yi Fang4, Jing Wang5. 1. Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. 2. Department of The Operating Room, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. 3. Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. wangzhongzhao206@sina.com. 4. Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. fangyi@cicams.ac.cn. 5. Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. wangjing@cicams.ac.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biological and synthetic meshes were used to cover the damaged muscle and augment the subpectoral pocket in breast reconstruction. However, few studies have directly compared the effects of biological and synthetic meshes. This study analyzed postoperative complications and assessed the patient-reported outcomes with the use of BioDesign® Surgisis and TiLOOP Bra/TiMesh® in one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction. METHODS: Patients undergoing one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction were enrolled in this study. Post-mastectomy breast reconstructions were facilitated with either Surgisis mesh or TiLOOP mesh. Complications were examined and patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes were evaluated using the BREAST-Q questionnaire (ver 2.0). The multivariate linear regression models were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 79 of 116 patients (68%) received breast reconstruction with Surgisis mesh and 37 (32%) with TiLOOP mesh. There was no difference in complication rates between the two groups postoperatively. But patient-reported satisfaction was higher with the use of Surgisis mesh than with TiLOOP mesh (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study reported no difference between the Surgisis group and the TiLOOP group in either complication rates or most patient-reported outcomes postoperatively. Yet the assessment of patient-reported satisfaction showed preference toward Surgisis mesh, a finding with a potential implication for mesh selection.
BACKGROUND: Biological and synthetic meshes were used to cover the damaged muscle and augment the subpectoral pocket in breast reconstruction. However, few studies have directly compared the effects of biological and synthetic meshes. This study analyzed postoperative complications and assessed the patient-reported outcomes with the use of BioDesign® Surgisis and TiLOOP Bra/TiMesh® in one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction. METHODS: Patients undergoing one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction were enrolled in this study. Post-mastectomy breast reconstructions were facilitated with either Surgisis mesh or TiLOOP mesh. Complications were examined and patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes were evaluated using the BREAST-Q questionnaire (ver 2.0). The multivariate linear regression models were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 79 of 116 patients (68%) received breast reconstruction with Surgisis mesh and 37 (32%) with TiLOOP mesh. There was no difference in complication rates between the two groups postoperatively. But patient-reported satisfaction was higher with the use of Surgisis mesh than with TiLOOP mesh (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study reported no difference between the Surgisis group and the TiLOOP group in either complication rates or most patient-reported outcomes postoperatively. Yet the assessment of patient-reported satisfaction showed preference toward Surgisis mesh, a finding with a potential implication for mesh selection.
Authors: H M Heneghan; R S Prichard; R Lyons; P J Regan; J L Kelly; C Malone; R McLaughlin; K J Sweeney; M J Kerin Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2011-09-06 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Mark Sisco; Hongyan Du; Jeremy P Warner; Michael A Howard; David P Winchester; Katharine Yao Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-08-24 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Robert A Smith; Kimberly Andrews; Durado Brooks; Carol E DeSantis; Stacey A Fedewa; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Deana Manassaram-Baptiste; Otis W Brawley; Richard C Wender Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 508.702