Timeline and Incidence of Postoperative Complications in Prepectoral, Dual-Plane, and Total Submuscular Alloplastic Reconstruction With and Without Biosynthetic Scaffold Usage
- PMID: 36880719
- DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003482
Timeline and Incidence of Postoperative Complications in Prepectoral, Dual-Plane, and Total Submuscular Alloplastic Reconstruction With and Without Biosynthetic Scaffold Usage
Abstract
Introduction: Acellular dermal matrices and synthetic meshes are commonly used to improve inframammary-fold definition, minimize muscle excision, and allow for greater control over the surgical technique in implant-based breast reconstruction. The aims of this study are to compare various combinations of placement planes and biosynthetic scaffolds and to further examine the respective incidences of postoperative complications and the timeline of capsular contracture development.
Methods: A data set consisting of 220 patients (393 samples) who underwent 2-stage reconstruction between 2012 and 2021 was used in the study. χ 2 , Fisher exact test, and 1-way analysis of variance were used to identify significant differences between the 4 subgroups. Cox proportional-hazards model and Kaplan-Meier estimator were used for survival analysis.
Results: On univariate logistic regression (odds ratio, 0.21; P = 0.005), survival analysis ( P = 0.0082), and Cox-proportional hazard model (hazard ratio, 1.6; P = 0.01), poly-4-hydroxybutyrate mesh usage was linked to an increased risk of capsular contracture development. Prepectoral placement with no mesh and dual-plane placement with acellular dermal matrix showed similar timelines of capsular contracture development. The lowest incidences of capsular contracture occurred in the prepectoral placement and no mesh (49/161, 30.4%) and total submuscular subgroups (3/14, 21.4%). Infection, necrosis, and revision surgery rates did not differ significantly between the 4 groups.
Conclusions: The use of poly-4-hydroxybutyrate mesh in 2-stage breast reconstruction is correlated with a statistically significant increase in capsular contracture. Prepectoral placement with no biosynthetic scaffold had one of the lowest rates of contracture and may provide the most optimal balance between economic and clinical considerations in implant-based reconstruction.
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared.
Similar articles
-
Prepectoral Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction with Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate for Pocket Control without the Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix: A 4-Year Review.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024 Jul 1;154(1):15-24. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010914. Epub 2023 Jul 6. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024. PMID: 37410610
-
Comparative Postoperative Complications of Acellular Dermal Matrix and Mesh Use in Prepectoral and Subpectoral One-Stage Direct to Implant Reconstruction: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Ann Plast Surg. 2025 May 1;94(5):521-527. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000004233. Epub 2025 Jan 27. Ann Plast Surg. 2025. PMID: 39874556
-
ADMs and synthetic meshes improve implant-based breast reconstruction aesthetics, but at what cost?J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2023 May;80:178-181. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.03.009. Epub 2023 Mar 21. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2023. PMID: 37028245
-
A systematic review of complications in prepectoral breast reconstruction.J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019 Jul;72(7):1051-1059. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2019.04.005. Epub 2019 Apr 21. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019. PMID: 31076195
-
Comparison of Human, Porcine, and Bovine Acellular Dermal Matrix in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Scoping Review.Ann Plast Surg. 2022 Dec 1;89(6):694-702. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003319. Ann Plast Surg. 2022. PMID: 36416706
Cited by
-
Machine-Learning Prediction of Capsular Contraction after Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction.JPRAS Open. 2023 Aug 3;38:1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jpra.2023.07.008. eCollection 2023 Dec. JPRAS Open. 2023. PMID: 37662866 Free PMC article.
-
Current Global Trends in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Mar 3;60(3):431. doi: 10.3390/medicina60030431. Medicina (Kaunas). 2024. PMID: 38541157 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Current status prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction in the USA.Gland Surg. 2023 Dec 26;12(12):1794-1805. doi: 10.21037/gs-23-279. Epub 2023 Dec 22. Gland Surg. 2023. PMID: 38229837 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction in Patients with Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.Curr Oncol. 2025 Apr 16;32(4):231. doi: 10.3390/curroncol32040231. Curr Oncol. 2025. PMID: 40277787 Free PMC article.
-
Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction in Patients with Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: An Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) Clinical Practice Guideline.Curr Oncol. 2025 Jun 17;32(6):357. doi: 10.3390/curroncol32060357. Curr Oncol. 2025. PMID: 40558300 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Kolak A, Kamińska M, Sygit K, et al. Primary and secondary prevention of breast cancer. Ann Agric Environ Med . 2017;24:549–553.
-
- Browne JP, Jeevan R, Gulliver-Clarke C, et al. The association between complications and quality of life after mastectomy and breast reconstruction for breast cancer. Cancer . 2017;123:3460–3467.
-
- Adams WP Jr. Capsular contracture: what is it? What causes it? How can it be prevented and managed? Clin Plast Surg . 2009;36:119–126.
-
- Burkhardt BR, Fried M, Schnur PL, et al. Capsules, infection, and intraluminal antibiotics. Plast Reconstr Surg . 1981;68:43–49.
-
- Dancey A, Nassimizadeh A, Levick P. Capsular contracture—what are the risk factors? A 14 year series of 1400 consecutive augmentations. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg . 2012;65:213–218.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical