Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Sep 8;2(8):e192.
doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000140. eCollection 2014 Aug.

Tissue Reinforcement in Implant-based Breast Reconstruction

Affiliations

Tissue Reinforcement in Implant-based Breast Reconstruction

Michael Scheflan et al. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. .

Abstract

Background: Tissue reinforcement with allogeneic or xenogeneic acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) is increasingly used in single-stage (direct-to-implant) and 2-stage implant-based breast reconstruction following mastectomy. ADMs allow surgeons to control implant position and obviate the need for submuscular implant placement. Here, we review the benefits and risks of using ADMs in implant-based breast reconstruction based on available data.

Methods: A comprehensive analysis of the literature with focus on recent publications was performed. Additional information regarding the proper use of ADMs was based on our institutional experience.

Results: ADM use may improve definition of the lateral confines of the breast and lower pole projection. It may facilitate direct-to-implant procedures and improve aesthetic outcomes. The effect of ADMs on complication rates remains controversial. Known patient risk factors such as obesity, smoking, and radiotherapy should be considered during patient selection. For patients with healthy, well-vascularized skin envelopes, ADM-assisted direct-to- implant reconstruction is a safe and cost-effective alternative to 2-stage implant reconstruction, with low complication rates. ADMs may be used to treat capsular contracture, and limited available data further suggest the possibility that ADMs may reduce the risk of capsular contracture. Novel synthetic or biosynthetic tissue reinforcement devices with different physical and ease-of-use properties than ADMs are emerging options for reconstructive surgeons and patients who seek to avoid tissue products from human or mammalian cadavers.

Conclusions: ADM-assisted implant-based breast reconstruction may improve aesthetic outcomes. However, appropriate patient selection, surgical technique, and postoperative management are critical for its success, including minimizing the risk of complications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: Medical writing support for this manuscript was funded by Allergan, Inc. Dr. Scheflan serves as a consultant for Allergan, Inc., and a clinical investigator for TEI Biosciences Inc. Dr. Colwell is a consultant for Allergan, Inc. and LifeCell Corp. The Article Processing Charge was paid for by Allergan, Inc.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Use of ADM in implant-based breast reconstruction. Shown are the techniques practiced at the Assuta Medical Center (AMC), Tel Aviv (A) and the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), Boston (B)., The inferior origin of the pectoralis major is released on the aponeurosis of the external oblique and on the inferior sternum, with pectoralis elevation up to the 3 and 9 o’clock position (AMC) or the 4 and 8 o’clock position (MGH). A tailored fenestrated semioval (AMC) or a standard rectangular (MGH) ADM sheet is sewn inferiorly to the thoracic fascia or inframammary fold (if intact) and laterally to the thoracic fascia to form the implant pocket. In the AMC technique, the semioval ADM is split, and the medial and lateral tails are sutured to the pectoralis major with deep overlap of the tails underneath the muscle (A). In the MGH technique, the rectangular ADM is sewn edge to edge to the pectoralis major without overlap (B).
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Algorithm for implant-based reconstruction. Reprinted with permission from Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, et al. Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and cost. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1170–1178.

References

    1. Atisha D, Alderman AK, Lowery JC, et al. Prospective analysis of long-term psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: two-year postoperative results from the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Study. Ann Surg. 2008;247:1019–1028. - PubMed
    1. Roostaeian J, Crisera C. Current options in breast reconstruction with or without radiotherapy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2011;23:44–50. - PubMed
    1. Yueh JH, Slavin SA, Adesiyun T, et al. Patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparative evaluation of DIEP, TRAM, latissimus flap, and implant techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:1585–1595. - PubMed
    1. Christensen BO, Overgaard J, Kettner LO, et al. Long-term evaluation of postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Acta Oncol. 2011;50:1053–1061. - PubMed
    1. American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2012 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report. Available at: http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2012-P.... Accessed October 31, 2013.

LinkOut - more resources