1
|
Liang NE, Griffin MF, Berry CE, Parker JB, Downer MA, Wan DC, Longaker MT. Attenuating Chronic Fibrosis: Decreasing Foreign Body Response with Acellular Dermal Matrix. TISSUE ENGINEERING. PART B, REVIEWS 2023; 29:671-680. [PMID: 37212342 DOI: 10.1089/ten.teb.2023.0060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/23/2023]
Abstract
Surgical implants are increasingly used across multiple medical disciplines, with applications ranging from tissue reconstruction to improving compromised organ and limb function. Despite their significant potential for improving health and quality of life, biomaterial implant function is severely limited by the body's immune response to its presence: this is known as the foreign body response (FBR) and is characterized by chronic inflammation and fibrotic capsule formation. This response can result in life-threatening sequelae such as implant malfunction, superimposed infection, and associated vessel thrombosis, in addition to soft tissue disfigurement. Patients may require frequent medical visits, as well as repeated invasive procedures, increasing the burden on an already strained health care system. Currently, the FBR and the cells and molecular mechanisms that mediate it are poorly understood. With applications across a wide array of surgical specialties, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has emerged as a potential solution to the fibrotic reaction seen with FBR. Although the mechanisms by which ADM decreases chronic fibrosis remain to be clearly characterized, animal studies across diverse surgical models point to its biomimetic properties that facilitate decreased periprosthetic inflammation and improved host cell incorporation. Impact Statement Foreign body response (FBR) is a significant limitation to the use of implantable biomaterials. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been observed to decrease the fibrotic reaction seen with FBR, although its mechanistic details are poorly understood. This review is dedicated to summarizing the primary literature on the biology of FBR in the context of ADM use, using surgical models in breast reconstruction, abdominal and chest wall repair, and pelvic reconstruction. This article will provide readers with an overarching review of shared mechanisms for ADM across multiple surgical models and diverse anatomical applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Norah E Liang
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Michelle F Griffin
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Charlotte E Berry
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Jennifer B Parker
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
- Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Mauricio A Downer
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Derrick C Wan
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Michael T Longaker
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
- Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mohammadyari F, Parvin S, Khorvash M, Amini A, Behzadi A, HajEbrahimi R, Kasaei F, Olangian-Tehrani S. Acellular dermal matrix in reconstructive surgery: Applications, benefits, and cost. FRONTIERS IN TRANSPLANTATION 2023; 2:1133806. [PMID: 38993878 PMCID: PMC11235262 DOI: 10.3389/frtra.2023.1133806] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2022] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 07/13/2024]
Abstract
Modern tissue engineering has made substantial advancements that have revolutionized plastic surgery. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is an example that has gained considerable attention recently. ADM can be made from humans, bovines, or porcine tissues. ADM acts as a scaffold that incorporates into the recipient tissue. It is gradually infiltrated by fibroblasts and vascularized. Fortunately, many techniques have been used to remove cellular and antigenic components from ADM to minimize immune system rejection. ADM is made of collagen, fibronectin, elastin, laminin, glycosaminoglycans, and hyaluronic acid. It is used in critical wounds (e.g., diabetic wounds) to protect soft tissue and accelerate wound healing. It is also used in implant-based breast reconstruction surgery to improve aesthetic outcomes and reduce capsule contracture risk. ADM has also gained attention in abdominal and chest wall defects. Some studies have shown that ADM is associated with less erosion and infection in abdominal hernias than synthetic meshes. However, its higher cost prevents it from being commonly used in hernia repair. Also, using ADM in tendon repair (e.g., Achilles tendon) has been associated with increased stability and reduced rejection rate. Despite its advantages, ADM might result in complications such as hematoma, seroma, necrosis, and infection. Moreover, ADM is expensive, making it an unsuitable option for many patients. Finally, the literature on ADM is insufficient, and more research on the results of ADM usage in surgeries is needed. This article aims to review the literature regarding the application, Benefits, and costs of ADM in reconstructive surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sadaf Parvin
- School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Mohsen Khorvash
- School of Medicine, Islamic Azad University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Amirhasan Amini
- School of Medicine, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran
| | | | | | - Fatemeh Kasaei
- School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Sepehr Olangian-Tehrani
- School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
- Avicennet, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Weinzierl A, Schmauss D, Brucato D, Harder Y. Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy, from the Subpectoral to the Prepectoral Approach: An Evidence-Based Change of Mind? J Clin Med 2022; 11:jcm11113079. [PMID: 35683465 PMCID: PMC9181810 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11113079] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2022] [Revised: 05/16/2022] [Accepted: 05/27/2022] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Over the last years, prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction has undergone a renaissance due to several technical advancements regarding mastectomy techniques and surgical approaches for the placement and soft tissue coverage of silicone implants. Initially abandoned due to the high incidence of complications, such as capsular contraction, implant extrusion, and poor aesthetic outcome, the effective prevention of these types of complications led to the prepectoral technique coming back in style for the ease of implant placement and the conservation of the pectoralis muscle function. Additional advantages such as a decrease of postoperative pain, animation deformity, and operative time contribute to the steady gain in popularity. This review aims to summarize the factors influencing the trend towards prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction and to discuss the challenges and prospects related to this operative approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Weinzierl
- Institute for Clinical & Experimental Surgery, Saarland University, 66421 Homburg, Germany;
- Department of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Schmauss
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), 6900 Lugano, Switzerland; (D.S.); (D.B.)
- Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, 6900 Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Davide Brucato
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), 6900 Lugano, Switzerland; (D.S.); (D.B.)
| | - Yves Harder
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), 6900 Lugano, Switzerland; (D.S.); (D.B.)
- Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, 6900 Lugano, Switzerland
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|