Titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TiLoop Bra®)—an effective prevention for capsular contracture?

Breast reconstruction with TiLOOP® Bra: Another arrow in plastic surgeons' quiver?

BACKGROUND

The use of lower-pole sling products has made immediate breast reconstruction a feasible option in women undergoing skin-nipple sparing and skin-reducing mastectomies. To date, available data on the comparative efficacy of biological and synthetic meshes regarding postoperative complications are scattered and limited.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to screen three different databases (PubMed, Web of Sciences, and Embase) using the following keywords: "breast reconstruction" AND "TiLOOP®" OR "Titanium-Coated Polypropylene Mesh" OR "TCPM". The perioperative and demographic characteristics of patients, complications profiles, and patient-reported outcomes were considered.

RESULTS

We initially identified 234 articles, of which only 41, including 3923 patients and 5042 reconstructed breasts, fully satisfied the inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSION

TiLOOP® Bra could be considered a safe and aesthetically valid alternative to Acellular Dermal Matrices (ADMs) in non-smokers patients undergoing skin-nipple sparing and skin-reducing mastectomies and immediate reconstruction. In such populations, complications are more likely to develop in patients with extreme body mass index values. The incidence of seroma with TiLOOP® Bra is comparable to that of ADMs as it is the beneficial effect in radiated patients, where TiLOOP® Bra seems superior to implant alone reconstruction. It has a good bio-integration with host tissues and resistance to infections in patients with a weakened immune system as a consequence of oncologic perioperative treatments.

Safety and aesthetic outcomes of SERASYNTHⓇ MESH BR for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction: A retrospective single center analysis of 32 consecutive cases

Background

Bilateral mastectomy for both therapeutic and prophylactic reasons is becoming increasingly important. To achieve good results after mastectomy, synthetic meshes are often used as an alternative to acellular dermal matrices (ADMs). The aim of this study is to analyze the results of subcutaneous mastectomies and direct-to-implant breast reconstruction using SERASYNTHⓇ MESH BR.

Methods

In this work, data from mastectomies (n = 32) in 22 patients without prior radiation after breast reconstruction with SERASYNTHⓇ MESH BR from a single center were retrospectively analyzed with 1 year follow-up. Complications were categorized as serious (need for revision surgery) and minor events. Statistical analysis was performed using the t-test in SPSS. Data were compared with the existing literature.

Results

Major complications occurred in 15.6% (n = 5). Two out of five revisions were due to hematoma. In three cases, a seroma followed by other complications (e.g., infections, necrosis) necessitated revision. Minor complications occurred in 12.5% of cases. Due to the safety aspect, implants were replaced in each revision. There was no significant difference in complication rates between prophylactic and therapeutic mastectomies (p = 0.3815, SE = 0.171). There was no statistically significant difference in esthetic outcomes (p = 0.3846).

Conclusion

The application of the absorbable polymer poly-p-dioxanone SERASYNTHⓇ MESH BR has complication rates comparable to those reported in the existing literature. Careful patient selection is paramount in order to limit the complication rate. SERASYNTHⓇ MESH BR can be considered a safe tool to achieve esthetic results in combination with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction.

Comparative clinical outcomes of using three-dimensional and TIGR mesh in immediate breast reconstruction surgery for breast cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Breast reconstruction (BR) surgery is a widely utilized approach for women who have undergone mastectomy. Using synthetic mesh can offer advantages over other materials providing long-lasting support and natural-looking results. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of 3DMax™ mesh to TIGR mesh in BR surgery, providing clear information about the non-inferiority of 3DMax™ mesh to TIGR.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluates postoperative complications in breast cancer patients who underwent subcutaneous mastectomy with direct-to-implant immediate BR using silicone implants and either 3DMax™ mesh or TIGR® Matrix Surgical Mesh.

RESULTS

This study involved BR surgeries in 82 patients, including 57 surgeries in the 3D mesh group and 49 in the TIGR mesh group. The two groups had no significant differences regarding age, body mass index (BMI), cancer stage, or surgical complications. However, patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy had higher incidence rates of long-term complications than other patients. Patients with infection or partial necrosis had a heightened risk of implant loss.

CONCLUSION

The clinical results obtained in this study suggest that among synthetic meshes used in immediate BR, 3DMax™ is not inferior to TIGR Matrix Surgical Mesh regarding complications.

Novel three-dimensional acellular dermal matrix for prepectoral breast reconstruction: First year in review with BRAXON®Fast

Implant-based breast reconstruction is part of breast cancer treatment, and increasingly optimized reconstructive procedures exploit highly biocompatible materials to ensure enhanced aesthetic-functional results. Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are collagen-based materials that made prepectoral implant placement possible, thanks to their bioactive antifibrosis action. Recently, the first three-dimensional ADM, BRAXON^®Fast, has been produced. Its 3D design represents the technological evolution of BRAXON^® ADM, a flat collagen matrix, and allows for a time-saving complete wrapping of the synthetic prosthesis, thus creating a total biological interface on the implant with patient's tissues. Here, we report our experience on the first 23 eligible patients who received BRAXON^®Fast-assisted prepectoral reconstruction. On a total of 27 breasts, the overall complication rate was 11.1%, including one minor seroma (3.7%), one case of necrosis (3.7%), and one implant removal due to infection. As new-generation devices, 3D ADMs showed an effective performance, allowing to reduce the overall exposure time for implant preparation and providing an optimal safety profile.

PROMs in post-mastectomy care: Patient self-reports (BREAST-Q™) as a powerful instrument to personalize medical services

One of the goals of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is to satisfy the patient's outcome. Recent studies therefore tended to focus on the patient's perception of the care and on the impact on quality of life using patients-reported-outcome-measures (PROMs), able to measure the health status directly without the clinician's interposition. We present a preliminary prospective study on 333 patients who underwent mastectomy with IBR in a two-year period, in a single Italian centre, using a dedicated PROMs, the BREAST-Q™, to determine the patient's satisfaction. We studied two groups of IBR: Group A (two-step with tissue-expander) and Group B (one-step: prosthesis/mesh) and conducted a pre- and post-operative comparison for each group to evaluate score-gain over time, and a group-score comparison to determine whether differences were significant between reconstruction types. Two-hundred-and-nine were actually enrolled and 132 completed all the questionnaires. The response rate was 62.8% and the compliance rate (completion of all the questionnaires) was 63.1%. In both groups all the analyzed domains worsened comparing the pre and post-operative period; the differences were statistically significant only for physical and sexual-wellbeing. In the comparison between the two groups, none of the detected differences reached the statistical significance. According to our experience, we can state that PROMs could improve the health concept redefining the variables to be monitored even if data is still insufficient to draw any definitive conclusion. PROMs can help surgeons and patients decide the most appropriate surgery for a particular patient-profile and to identify those who require further support.

Nanomedicines - Tiny particles and big challenges

After decades of research, nanotechnology has been used in a broad array of biomedical products including medical devices, drug products, drug substances, and pharmaceutical-grade excipients. But like many great achievements in science, there is a fine balance between the risks and opportunities of this new technology. Some materials and surface structures in the nanosize range can exert unexpected toxicities and merit a more detailed safety assessment. Regulatory agencies such as the United States Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicines Agency have started dealing with the potential risks posed by nanomaterials. Considering that a thorough characterization is one of the key aspects of controlling such risks this review presents the regulatory background of nanosafety assessment and provides some practical advice on how to characterize nanomaterials and drug formulations. Further, the challenges of how to maintain and monitor pharmaceutical quality through a highly complex production processes will be discussed.

Polymeric Biomaterials for Medical Implants and Devices

In this review article, we focus on the various types of materials used in biomedical implantable devices, including the polymeric materials used as substrates and for the packaging of such devices. Polymeric materials are used because of the ease of fabrication, flexibility, and their biocompatible nature as well as their wide range of mechanical, electrical, chemical, and thermal behaviors when combined with different materials as composites. Biocompatible and biostable polymers are extensively used to package implanted devices, with the main criteria that include gas permeability and water permeability of the packaging polymer to protect the electronic circuit of the device from moisture and ions inside the human body. Polymeric materials must also have considerable tensile strength and should be able to contain the device over the envisioned lifetime of the implant. For substrates, structural properties and, at times, electrical properties would be of greater concern. Section 1 gives an introduction of some medical devices and implants along with the material requirements and properties needed. Different synthetic polymeric materials such as polyvinylidene fluoride, polyethylene, polypropylene, polydimethylsiloxane, parylene, polyamide, polytetrafluoroethylene, poly(methyl methacrylate), polyimide, and polyurethane have been examined, and liquid crystalline polymers and nanocomposites have been evaluated as biomaterials that are suitable for biomedical packaging (section 2). A summary and glimpse of the future trend in this area has also been given (section 3). Materials and information used in this manuscript are adapted from papers published between 2010 and 2015 representing the most updated information available on each material.

TiLoop® Bra mesh used for immediate breast reconstruction: comparison of retropectoral and subcutaneous implant placement in a prospective single-institution series

BACKGROUND

Immediate implant reconstruction after a conservative mastectomy is an attractive option made easier by prosthetic devices. Titanized polypropylene meshes are used as a hammock to cover the lower lateral implant pole. We conducted a prospective nonrandomized single-institution study of reconstructions using titanium-coated meshes either in a standard muscular mesh pocket or in a complete subcutaneous approach. The complete subcutaneous approach means to wrap an implant with titanized mesh in order to position the implant subcutaneously and spare muscles.

METHODS

Between November 2011 and January 2014, we performed immediate implant breast reconstructions after conservative mastectomies using TiLoop® Bra, either with the standard retropectoral or with a prepectoral approach. Selection criteria included only women with normal Body Mass Index (BMI), no large and very ptotic breasts, no history of smoking, no diabetes, and no previous radiotherapy. We analyzed short-term outcomes of such procedures and compared the outcomes to evaluate implant losses and surgical complications.

RESULTS

A total of 73 mastectomies were performed. Group 1 comprised 29 women, 5 bilateral procedures, 34 reconstructions, using the standard muscular mesh pocket. Group 2 comprised 34 women, 5 bilateral procedures, 39 reconstructions with the prepectoral subcutaneous technique. Baseline and oncologic characteristics were homogeneous between the two groups. After a median follow-up period of 13 and 12 months, respectively, no implant losses were recorded in group 1, and one implant loss was recorded in group 2. We registered three surgical complications in group 1 and two surgical complications in group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Titanium-coated polypropylene meshes, as a tool for immediate definitive implant breast reconstruction, resulted as safe and effective in a short-term analysis, both for a retropectoral and a totally subcutaneous implant placement. Long-term results are forthcoming. A strict selection is mandatory to achieve optimal results. Level of Evidence: Level II, therapeutic study.