Impact and outcome of human acellular dermal matrix size for immediate and two-stage breast reconstruction
- PMID: 23806904
- DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31829194eb
Impact and outcome of human acellular dermal matrix size for immediate and two-stage breast reconstruction
Abstract
Background: Following mastectomy, patients may choose to have breast reconstruction with autologous tissue or implants. Human acellular dermal matrix has been described as a tissue supplement where the implant is covered, without requiring further muscle elevation or dissection. The authors evaluated the impact of different matrix sizes.
Methods: Fifty-two patients (average age, 48.5 years) and 88 operated breasts were evaluated. The cohort was divided into two, depending on matrix size. In group A, a small matrix with a surface area of 48 or 96 cm was used. In group B, a larger matrix with either 128 or 160 cm was used. Intraoperative fill volumes, expansion procedure, and complications were analyzed.
Results: Size difference was significant (69.2 versus 135.5 cm). The calculated mean initial filling volume-to-excised pathology tissue weight ratio and the initial filling-to-final implant volume ratio were significant. Average number of fills to reach final expansion volume was 62.3 percent, or 4.7 times lower in group B. Seven complications were reported without any statistical difference between groups.
Conclusions: This study suggests that using a larger human acellular dermal matrix in breast reconstruction offers a potential to increase the initial expander fill volume-to-breast pathology weight ratio and initial expander fill volume-to-final implant volume ratio. Larger matrices can reduce the number of subsequent expansions and may even decrease the risk of postoperative complications. This study also revealed that using a larger matrix is a safe method that does not increase complications.
Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.
Comment in
-
Discussion: impact and outcome of human acellular dermal matrix size for immediate and two-stage breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Jul;132(1):19-21. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318290f6fc. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013. PMID: 23806905 No abstract available.
References
-
- Gurunluoglu R, Gurunluoglu A, Williams SA, Tebockhorst S. Current trends in breast reconstruction: Survey of American Society of Plastic Surgeons 2010. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70:103–110
-
- Nahabedian MY. AlloDerm performance in the setting of prosthetic breast surgery, infection, and irradiation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1743–1753
-
- Antony AK, McCarthy CM, Cordeiro PG, et al. Acellular human dermis implantation in 153 immediate two-stage tissue expander breast reconstructions: Determining the incidence and significant predictors of complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:1606–1614
-
- Namnoum JD. Expander/implant reconstruction with AlloDerm: Recent experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:387–394
-
- Chun YS, Verma K, Rosen H, et al. Implant-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix and the risk of postoperative complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:429–436
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
