Decreased Length of Postoperative Drain Use, Parenteral Opioids, Length of Stay, and Complication Rates in Patients Receiving Meshed versus Unmeshed Acellular Dermal Matrix in 194 Submuscular Tissue Expander-Based Breast Reconstructions: A Single-Surgeon Cohort Study

Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant versus Staged Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: A Comparison of Complications

BACKGROUND

Direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstruction has multiple advantages over a staged tissue expander (TE) approach. However, its use may be limited by concerns of increased complications. This study is the largest series to date comparing postoperative outcomes for DTI versus TE reconstruction in the prepectoral plane.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively reviewed 348 patients who underwent 536 total immediate, prepectoral implant-based breast reconstructions between January of 2018 and December of 2021. The authors compared the presence of risk factors and the rate of six separate complications between patients who underwent DTI versus TE reconstruction up to 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

Of 348 patients, 147 (42%) and 201 (58%) underwent TE and DTI reconstruction ( P = 0.1813), respectively. The overall infection rate was 16.4% ( n = 57). DTI patients had a significantly greater incidence of wounds ( P < 0.0001), including minor ( P < 0.0011) and major wounds ( P < 0.0053). Significantly greater mastectomy resection weights were found for DTI patients who experienced any complication ( P < 0.0076), postoperative wounds ( P < 0.0001), and major wounds specifically ( P < 0.0035). Compared with medium-thickness acellular dermal matrix (ADM), extra thick ADM was associated with significantly increased rates of infection ( P < 0.0408) and wounds ( P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prepectoral DTI reconstruction in patients with adequate flap perfusion may have complication rates comparable to staged TE reconstruction, apart from a higher incidence of postoperative wounds. Greater mastectomy resection weights and thickness of ADM may specifically contribute to infection and wound-healing complications. Prepectoral DTI reconstruction is encouraged in the patients with adequate flap perfusion and moderate to low mastectomy resection weights who desire comparable or smaller implant volumes.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Early Complications after Prepectoral Tissue Expander Placement in Breast Reconstruction with and without Acellular Dermal Matrix

BACKGROUND

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has become popularized with the concurrent use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). The authors sought to compare 3-month postoperative complication rates and explantation rates for first-stage, tissue-expander-based, prepectoral breast reconstruction with and without the use of ADM.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective chart review was performed to identify consecutive patients undergoing prepectoral tissue-expander-based breast reconstruction from August of 2020 to January of 2022. Chi-square tests were used to compare demographic categorical variables, and multiple variable regression models were used to identify variables associated with 3-month postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

The authors enrolled 124 consecutive patients. Fifty-five patients (98 breasts) were included in the no-ADM cohort and 69 patients (98 breasts) were included in the ADM cohort. There were no statistically significant differences between the ADM and no-ADM cohorts with regard to 90-day postoperative outcomes. On multivariable analysis, there were no independent associations between seroma, hematoma, wound dehiscence, mastectomy skin flap necrosis, infection, unplanned return to the operating room, or explantation in the ADM and no-ADM groups after controlling for age, body mass index, history of diabetes, tobacco use, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and postoperative radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' results reveal no significant differences in odds of postoperative complications, unplanned return to the operating room, or explantation between the ADM and no-ADM cohorts. More studies are needed to evaluate the safety of prepectoral, tissue expander placement without ADM.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Meshed Acellular Dermal Matrix for Two-Staged Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: An Institutional Experience

The introduction of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) to breast reconstruction has allowed surgeons to reexplore the prepectoral implant placement technique in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Our institution adopted a novel approach using meshed ADM to lessen the financial burden of increased ADM utilization with the prepectoral breast reconstruction. This is a retrospective, single-center review of two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction using meshed human-derived ADM for anterior prosthesis coverage. Patient demographics, oncologic data, perioperative characteristics, and complications were examined and reported as means with standard deviations. Cost-saving with the meshed technique was evaluated. Forty-eight patients (72 breasts) with a mean age of 48.5 ± 15.0 years (range 26–70 years) were included in the study. The mean follow-up time was 13.2 ± 4.4 months (range 4.1–25.8 months). Nineteen breasts (24.6%) experienced complications, with seromas being the most common complication (12.5%, n  = 9). Expander removal and reoperation occurred at a rate of 8.3 and 9.7%, respectively. The average time to drain removal was 18.8 ± 6.6 days (range 8–32 days). Meshed ADM provided an average cost savings of $6,601 for unilateral and $13,202 for bilateral reconstructions. Our study found that human-derived meshed ADM can be safely used in two-staged prepectoral tissue expander-based breast reconstruction and can result in significant cost savings.

The relationship of human acellular dermal matrix thickness on complication rate and patient-reported outcomes in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction

Background

As it can be said that prosthetic breast reconstruction has been increased by the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs), ADMs are widely used in implant reconstruction. A large variety types of ADMs are now produced, but there is a paucity of data comparing the ADM products directly. We evaluated the effects of ADM thickness on complication rates and patient satisfaction after dual-plane subpectoral ADM-assisted implant breast reconstruction.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients who underwent immediate implant breast reconstruction using ADM was performed. We compared clinical course and postoperative outcomes for two ADM groups with different thicknesses [thin ADMs, 0.6-1.5 mm (group 1) vs. thick ADMs, 1.5-3.0 mm (group 2)] based on the incidence of complications and the duration of drainage. Patient satisfaction was also evaluated using the Breast Questionnaire (BREAST-Q), 6 months after surgery.

Results

A total of 51 patients were included in the study (group 1, n=21; group 2, n=30). Patient demographics were similar between the two groups, and no difference in postoperative complication rate (P>0.05) and Jackson-Pratt (JP) drainage durations (P>0.05). On regression analysis, ADM thickness was not an independent factor for any complication subtype. There were also no significant differences in BREAST-Q results, across all metrics, between the study groups.

Conclusions

In dual plane subpectoral implant placement breast reconstruction with an inferior ADM-sling, the thickness of ADM was not a factor in determining postoperative complications and patient satisfaction. Therefore, it is possible to select the thickness according to the surgeon's preference.

Meshed Acellular Dermal Matrix in Immediate Prepectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction

Prepectoral implant placement has many potential advantages in immediate breast reconstruction. Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are commonly used in these surgeries. ADM meshing may enhance integration, decrease seroma and infection rates, and reduce surgical costs.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study of 49 women (71 breasts) undergoing immediate, prepectoral, implant-based breast reconstruction with 2:1 meshed, bovine-derived ADM (SurgiMend). Outcomes were compared against those of 77 patients (105 breasts) undergoing a similar procedure but with partial subpectoral implant placement.

RESULTS

In the prepectoral group, the mean age was 49.1 years and mean body mass index was 24.7 kg/m². There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics versus the partial subpectoral control group. Mean follow-up was 18.6 months (prepectoral) and 21.3 months (partial subpectoral). Mean time to drain removal was reduced in the prepectoral group (6.5 versus 8.5 days; P < 0.001). Rates of minor and major complications with prepectoral implant placement were 15.5% and 11.3%, respectively - similar to partial subpectoral placement (15.2% and 14.3%) (overall P = 0.690). Capsular contracture and explantation were associated with radiation therapy, and rates were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prepectoral implant placement with meshed ADM is a safe and reproducible alternative to partial muscle coverage with meshed ADM. Recovery may be easier and animation deformity avoided. It could therefore become the standard of care for implant-based breast reconstruction.

Overview of Risk Factors and Prevention of Capsular Contracture Following Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction and Cosmetic Surgery: A Systematic Review

Capsular contracture is one of the most common complications of implant-based breast reconstruction or augmentation surgery. Despite advanced molecular biology, the exact mechanism of this complication is not fully understood. PubMed was searched for studies, published from 2015 to 2020, focused on potential risk factors and preventions of capsular contracture (CC) in patients who underwent implant-based breast surgery. A total of 533 articles were identified from PubMed, and 13 articles were selected ultimately for our review after eligibility screening and quality appraisal. Common risk factors of CC include biofilm, surgical site infections (SSI), history of prior CC or fibrosis, history of radiation therapy, and implant characteristics. Interventions that decrease the rate of CC include antibiotic prophylaxis or irrigation, acellular dermal matrix (ADM), leukotriene (LTE) inhibitors, surgical techniques, and others. Multiple risk factors are proposed to be a component of the pathophysiology of CC. However, there is inconsistent evidence supporting these risk factors, and the current data was based on broad heterogeneous studies. While efforts are being undertaken to solve this complication with improved technologies and surgical practices, CC remains to be unsolved. Our objective was to provide a summary of the current data of contributing risk factors as well as preventative and treatment measures for CC.