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
- PMID: 37410610
- DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010914
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
Abstract
Background: Absorbable mesh has been used to mitigate the potential drawbacks of acellular dermal matrix (ADM)-based breast reconstruction. Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB) has been demonstrated to be a lower-cost, safe, and effective alternative to ADM in subpectoral breast reconstruction. In this study, the authors used P4HB for pocket control and implant support in immediate two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction, examining nonintegration, capsular contracture, implant malposition, patient comorbidities, and risk factors.
Methods: A retrospective review of a single surgeon's (K.M.) experience was performed over a 4-year span for patients who had undergone immediate two-stage prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with P4HB mesh. Complications (implant loss, rippling, capsular contracture, and malposition) and patient satisfaction were examined.
Results: From 2018 to 2022, 105 patients underwent breast reconstruction using P4HB mesh on a total of 194 breasts. P4HB mesh integration was 97%. Sixteen breasts (8.2%) experienced minor complications, and 10.3% of devices required explantation, which was significantly higher in the irradiated group at 28.6% ( P < 0.01). Patients who were older, had a higher body mass index, were active smokers, or had an increased mastectomy specimen size were more likely to undergo explantation. The capsular contracture rate and overall lateral malposition rate were 1.0%. Visible rippling was present in 15.6% of breasts. There was no significant difference between smile mastopexy and inferolateral incision with regard to capsular contracture, lateral malposition, and rippling. Overall, patients demonstrated a high level of satisfaction. There were no significant predictors of capsular contracture, lateral malposition, or visible rippling.
Conclusions: The authors show the safety and efficacy of P4HB in two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction. There appears to be equal, if not reduced, capsular contracture rates when compared with the published data on ADM. This represents a large cost reduction to both the patient and the health care system.
Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, IV.
Copyright © 2023 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
Comment in
-
Discussion: 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):25-26. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000011096. Epub 2024 Jun 24. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024. PMID: 38923923 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Aesthetic Limitations in Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2022 Jul 1;150(1):22e-31e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009189. Epub 2022 May 2. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2022. PMID: 35499675
-
Outcomes after tissue expander exchange to implant in two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix: A retrospective cohort study.J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2024 Feb;89:97-104. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.12.008. Epub 2023 Dec 12. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2024. PMID: 38160591
-
Long-Term Outcomes following Hybrid Breast Reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024 Aug 1;154(2):217e-223e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010987. Epub 2023 Aug 11. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024. PMID: 37566525
-
An Algorithmic Approach to Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: Version 2.0.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 May;143(5):1311-1319. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005519. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019. PMID: 31033812 Review.
-
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
Cited by
-
Single-Stage Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Acellular Dermal Matrix after Breast Cancer: Comparative Study and Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction Outcomes.Cancers (Basel). 2023 Nov 9;15(22):5349. doi: 10.3390/cancers15225349. Cancers (Basel). 2023. PMID: 38001609 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.
References
-
- Sorkin M, Qi J, Kim HM, et al. Acellular dermal matrix in immediate expander/implant breast reconstruction: a multicenter assessment of risks and benefits. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:1091–1100.
-
- Basu CB, Leong M, Hicks MJ. Acellular cadaveric dermis decreases the inflammatory response in capsule formation in reconstructive breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:1842–1847.
-
- Hammond DC. Commentary on: prepectoral revision breast reconstruction for treatment of implant-associated animation deformity: a review of 102 reconstructions. Aesthet Surg J. 2018;38:527–528.
-
- Vardanian AJ, Clayton JL, Roostaeian J, et al. Comparison of implant-based immediate breast reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:403e–410e.
-
- Maxwell GP, Gabriel A. Bioengineered breast: concept, technique, and preliminary results. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137:415–421.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous