Concerns Regarding the Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix at the Time of Primary Breast Augmentation

Immediate Prepectoral Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrix Is Equally Safe Following Skin-Sparing and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has become increasingly popular over the last decade. There is a paucity of data surrounding the impact of mastectomy type on clinical outcomes when comparing prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) using tissue expansion. The purpose of this study was to compare 90-day reconstructive surgical outcomes in immediate prepectoral tissue expander reconstruction between patients with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patient records was carried out on all patients undergoing NSM or SSM with immediate prepectoral tissue expander reconstruction without ADM, in a single institution, from June 2020 to December 2021. All complications were recorded, categorized, and statistically analyzed for significance.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients (97 breasts) were studied. The mean age was 51 years old (range, 31-77). Twenty-two patients suffered complications recorded in 22 breasts (22.7%). There was no statistically significant difference in the total complications between the NSM (25.7%) and SSM (21.0%) groups or in the incidence of all major and minor complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast reconstruction using tissue expanders without ADM has similar reconstructive outcomes in both NSM and SSM. There were no significant differences in complication rates between either groups. Breast reconstruction without ADM can confer institutional cost savings without compromising safety.

Acellular dermal matrix in breast augmentation surgery: A systematic review

Background

The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast reconstruction was described for the first time in 2000s. Recently, ADMs have been used not only in reconstructive surgery but also in cosmetic breast surgery for both primary and revision indications. Therefore, the matrices represent an important support to recent surgical techniques for breast augmentation in treatment or prevention of complications. Conversely, ADMs can affect operative times, costs, and additional complications related to their placement. A review of the literature was carried out to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and indication for the use of these matrices in cosmetic breast surgery.

Methods

A literature review was conducted including manuscripts published up to April 2023 on breast augmentation using ADM. PubMed and MEDLINE were the databases used for research. The keywords used were "Breast augmentation" and "Acellular Dermal Matrix." Non-English language articles have been excluded.

Results

The initial search for "breast augmentation" yielded 7900 results, which were further reviewed for "Acellular Dermal Matrices" in breast augmentation, selecting 74 articles. Following further screening, 12 articles were included in the review. A total of 787 patients were treated with breast augmentation and ADM placement. The main indication was capsular contracture (60%).

Conclusions

The current evidence from the published scientific literature, albeit limited, suggests the indication for the use of ADM in revision surgery, to support the prosthetic pocket, to minimize the risk of capsular contracture and its recurrence.

Peer Review: How to Review a Plastic Surgery Manuscript

ABSTRACT

Little information is available regarding how to review a plastic surgery manuscript. This vital responsibility ensures that publications meet an acceptable scientific standard. Thoughtful and thorough reviews are essential to protect patients and surgeons from unscientific practices and products. This discussion provides information for the reviewer, gained from the author's experience, including examples of a thorough review, likely to be useful to the editor, and a cursory one that is unhelpful.The first consideration is relevance. Prerequisites for publication include institutional review board approval, disclosure of financial conflicts, and discussion of the regulatory status of devices. Particular attention is needed to check for conflicts of interest, which are endemic in plastic surgery today. In view of the common practice of using computer-generated imaging, reviewers need to be especially vigilant for inauthentic "photoshopped" photographs. Examples of published images that have been digitally altered are provided.If data are available, it may be possible to check the statistical tests. Reviewers need to be aware of the practice of p-hacking. A quick literature search can identify relevant but unreferenced publications. The manuscript needs to be properly organized into sections. Minor points may be made regarding style. The study design and methodology need to be evaluated to be sure that the conclusions are well supported by data. Randomized studies are rarely feasible. Fortunately, well-done prospective observational studies in consecutive patients can be just as useful. Realistic complication rates are expected. Meta-analyses in plastic surgery are often subject to confounding variables. Comments should be available to the authors; confidential comments hidden from authors are discouraged. Like honesty, transparency is the best policy. Manuscripts should be evaluated solely for merit, not the identity of the author or institution. Timeliness of submission of the review is appreciated by authors.Evidence-based medicine is concerned solely with the facts. The 2 basic criteria are a solid scientific basis and reliable evidence of efficacy. Reviewers need to keep an open mind. Studies that challenge the status quo are often the most valuable ones and are needed for the advancement of the specialty.

"Never Trust the Skin": A Rationale for Using Polydioxanone Internal Support Matrix to Minimize Scarring in Primary Mastopexy-Augmentation-An Observational Study

Background

The process of scar formation is complex and multi-factorial. Basic plastic surgery tenets focus on tension-free techniques to optimize aesthetic outcomes and minimize scarring.

Objectives

Prophylactic use of a polydioxanone (PDO) internal support matrix in cosmetic mastopexy-augmentation to decrease scar burden has never before been described.

Methods

A high volume (n = 41) single-surgeon mastopexy-augmentation experience (S.S.K.) followed scar quality in consecutive cases from June 2020 to July 2021. A minimum of 6 months of postoperative evaluation was required to assess scar quality. Fitzpatrick scores were also evaluated and compared. All surgeries in this study were performed in the dual plane using silicone gel implants, a superior or superomedial dermal pedicle blood supply, and a wise-pattern or vertical scar. Scar quality was evaluated by photography and scored according to an internally developed scar quality scale.

Results

There have been no cases of hypertrophic or keloid scarring. All patients receiving mastopexy-augmentation with prophylactic PDO mesh have a favorable appearance with fine line scars, and the mean scar quality scale score across the cohort was 4.341/5. The mean Fitzpatrick scale score across the cohort was 2.97, and, of the patients who scored a 5 on the scar quality index, the mean Fitzpatrick scale score was 3.545.

Conclusions

Prophylactic use of PDO internal support matrix in silicone gel mastopexy-augmentation offers further protection against poor scarring in patients across the Fitzpatrick scale, with varying degrees of skin quality, and across medium to high-volume implant augmentations. Patients who received PDO prophylaxis demonstrated a better-than-average scar appearance.

Level of Evidence 4