Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs
- PMID: 22094736
- DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318230c2f6
Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs
Abstract
Background: Immediate single-stage direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix optimizes aesthetics by preserving the mastectomy skin envelope. The authors report trends, early complications, and costs.
Methods: A retrospective review of three surgeons' experience was performed for immediate single-stage implant reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix and tissue expander reconstruction without it at Massachusetts General Hospital.
Results: Two hundred eleven patients had 331 direct-to-implant reconstructions using AlloDerm following nipple-sparing (n = 66) or skin-sparing (n = 265) mastectomy for cancer (n = 216) or prophylaxis (n = 115). The number of single-stage implant reconstructions increased from seven in 2006 to 116 in 2009. The percentage performed for prophylaxis increased from 29 percent to 41 percent. Fifty-one patients underwent preoperative (n = 33) or postoperative (n = 18) irradiation. Total complications included 10 infections (3.0 percent), five seromas (1.5 percent), four hematomas (1.2 percent), and 30 reconstructions (9.1 percent), with skin necrosis leading to five implant losses (1.5 percent). Tissue expander reconstruction without AlloDerm had a similar total complication rate (158 reconstructions) (p = 0.18), including nine infections (5.7 percent), three seromas (1.9 percent), three hematomas (1.9 percent), and 16 reconstructions (10.1 percent), with skin necrosis leading to 11 implant losses (7.0 percent). A higher complication rate occurred in the surgeons' combined first year performing single-stage implant reconstruction (21.4 percent) compared with subsequent years (10.9 percent) (p < 0.02) and in one- or two-stage reconstruction patients undergoing irradiation (p = 0.005). There was no significant difference in total overall costs (p = 0.8).
Conclusions: Immediate single-stage implant reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix offers a cost-effective reconstruction with a low complication rate. This may be the procedure of choice in select patients.
Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.
Similar articles
-
440 Consecutive immediate, implant-based, single-surgeon breast reconstructions in 281 patients: a comparison of early outcomes and costs between SurgiMend fetal bovine and AlloDerm human cadaveric acellular dermal matrices.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 May;131(5):940-951. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182865ab3. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013. PMID: 23629076
-
The use of acellular dermal matrix in immediate two-stage tissue expander breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 May;129(5):1049-1058. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824a2acb. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012. PMID: 22544088
-
Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction with Simultaneous Nipple-Sparing Mastopexy Utilizing an Inferiorly Based Adipodermal Flap: Our Experience with Prepectoral and Subpectoral Techniques.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020 May;145(5):1125-1133. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006781. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020. PMID: 32332524
-
A comparison of acellular dermal matrix to autologous dermal flaps in single-stage, implant-based immediate breast reconstruction: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 May;131(5):953-961. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182865a24. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013. PMID: 23629077 Review.
-
Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction: a systematic and critical review of efficacy and associated morbidity.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Dec;128(6):1162-1169. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318230c29e. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011. PMID: 22094735 Review.
Cited by
-
A Meta-analysis Assessing Postsurgical Outcomes between Aseptic and Sterile AlloDerm Regenerative Tissue Matrix.Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Jul 8;3(6):e409. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000387. eCollection 2015 Jun. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015. PMID: 26180710 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A retrospective review of breast reconstruction outcomes comparing AlloDerm and DermaCELL.JPRAS Open. 2019 Jul 24;22:19-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jpra.2019.07.005. eCollection 2019 Dec. JPRAS Open. 2019. PMID: 32158893 Free PMC article.
-
Two-Stage Tissue-Expander Breast Reconstruction: A Focus on the Surgical Technique.Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:1791546. doi: 10.1155/2017/1791546. Epub 2017 Dec 10. Biomed Res Int. 2017. PMID: 29376067 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Direct-to-Implant vs Tissue Expander Placement in Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Cohort Study.Aesthet Surg J. 2024 Jul 15;44(8):839-849. doi: 10.1093/asj/sjae054. Aesthet Surg J. 2024. PMID: 38452172
-
Dual-Plane Retro-pectoral Versus Pre-pectoral DTI Breast Reconstruction: An Italian Multicenter Experience.Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2021 Feb;45(1):51-60. doi: 10.1007/s00266-020-01892-y. Epub 2020 Aug 28. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2021. PMID: 32860077 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials