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
Comparative Study
. 2018 Mar;141(3):541-549.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004109.

Evaluation of Acellular Dermal Matrix Efficacy in Prosthesis-Based Breast Reconstruction

Nikhil Sobti  1   2 , Emily Ji  1   2 , Rebecca L Brown  1   2 , Curtis L Cetrulo Jr  1   2 , Amy S Colwell  1   2 , Jonathan M Winograd  1   2 , William G Austen Jr  1   2 , Eric C Liao  1   2
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Evaluation of Acellular Dermal Matrix Efficacy in Prosthesis-Based Breast Reconstruction

Nikhil Sobti et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Although many studies have examined the safety of acellular dermal matrix in immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction, few studies have evaluated efficacy. This study examined initial tissue expander fill volume as a marker of efficacy, comparing patients after staged prosthetic breast reconstruction assisted with acellular dermal matrix versus breast reconstruction not assisted with acellular dermal matrix. Number of fill visits and time interval to implant exchange were examined as secondary endpoints.

Methods: An institutional review board-approved retrospective chart review was conducted to identify consecutive staged prosthetic reconstruction cases over 12 years.

Results: Mean initial tissue expander fill volume was significantly higher in the acellular dermal matrix group compared with the non-acellular dermal matrix group (180.8 ± 150.0 versus 45.8 ± 74.4; p = 0.00). Normalizing for final implant size, the acellular dermal matrix group exhibited significantly higher perioperative fill (0.33 ± 0.24 versus 0.11 ± 0.16; p = 0.00). A collinear trend was observed between acellular dermal matrix use and direct-to-implant reconstruction procedures during the study period.

Conclusions: These results suggest that acellular dermal matrix use is more efficacious in achieving greater initial fill volume, fewer visits for expansion, and a shorter time interval to implant exchange compared with non-acellular dermal matrix procedures. The authors also describe a collinear relationship between acellular dermal matrix use and transition to direct-to-implant procedures at their institution. This work serves as a framework for future studies evaluating acellular dermal matrix efficacy, and guides innovation of biomaterials to support breast reconstruction.

Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Macadam SA, Lennox PAAcellular dermal matrices: Use in reconstructive and aesthetic breast surgery. Can J Plast Surg. 2012;20:7589.
    1. Phillips BT, Bishawi M, Dagum AB, Bui DT, Khan SUA systematic review of infection rates and associated antibiotic duration in acellular dermal matrix breast reconstruction. Eplasty 2014;14:e42.
    1. Breuing KH, Colwell ASInferolateral AlloDerm hammock for implant coverage in breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2007;59:250255.
    1. Breuing KH, Warren SMImmediate bilateral breast reconstruction with implants and inferolateral AlloDerm slings. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;55:232239.
    1. Becker S, Saint-Cyr M, Wong C, et al.AlloDerm versus DermaMatrix in immediate expander-based breast reconstruction: A preliminary comparison of complication profiles and material compliance. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123:16; discussion 107108.