Archives of Plastic Surgery

Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A comparative study between sterile freeze-dried and sterile pre-hydrated acellular dermal matrix in tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction

  • Cheon, Jeong Hyun (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Korea University College Medicine) ;
  • Yoon, Eul Sik (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Korea University College Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Jin Woo (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Korea University College Medicine) ;
  • Park, Seung Ha (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Korea University College Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Byung Il (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Korea University College Medicine)
  • Received : 2018.09.17
  • Accepted : 2019.03.06
  • Published : 2019.05.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background In implant-based breast reconstruction, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is essential for supporting the inferolateral pole. Recent studies have compared non-sterilized freeze-dried ADM and sterilized pre-hydrated ADM, but have not assessed whether differences were attributable to factors related to sterile processing or packaging. This study was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of breast reconstruction using two types of sterile-processed ADMs. Methods Through a retrospective chart review, we analyzed 77 consecutive patients (85 breasts) who underwent tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction with either freeze-dried ADM (35 breasts) or pre-hydrated ADM (50 breasts) from March 2016 to February 2018. Demographic variables, postoperative outcomes, and operative parameters were compared between freeze-dried and pre-hydrated ADM. Biopsy specimens were obtained for histologic analysis. Results We obtained results after adjusting for variables found to be significant in univariate analyses. The total complication rate for freeze-dried and pre-hydrated ADMs was 25.7% and 22.0%, respectively. Skin necrosis was significantly more frequent in the freeze-dried group than in the pre-hydrated group (8.6% vs. 4.0%, P=0.038). All other complications and operative parameters showed no significant differences. In the histologic analysis, collagen density, inflammation, and vascularity were higher in the pre-hydrated ADM group (P=0.042, P=0.006, P=0.005, respectively). Conclusions There are limited data comparing the outcomes of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction using two types of sterile-processed ADMs. In this study, we found that using pre-hydrated ADM resulted in less skin necrosis and better integration into host tissue. Pre-hydrated ADM may therefore be preferable to freeze-dried ADM in terms of convenience and safety.

Keywords

References

  1. Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, et al. A paradigm shift in U.S. breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131:15-23. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182729cde
  2. American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2016 Plastic surgery procedural statistics [Internet]. Arlington Heights, IL: American Society of Plastic Surgeons; c2017 [cited 2019 Mar 31]. Available from https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2016/plastic-surgery-statistics-full-report-2016.pdf.
  3. Chao AH. A review of the use of acellular dermal matrices in postmastectomy immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Surg Nurs 2015;35:131-4. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSN.0000000000000103
  4. Yuen JC, Yue CJ, Erickson SW, et al. Comparison between freeze-dried and ready-to-use AlloDerm in alloplastic breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2014;2:e119. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000061
  5. Buseman J, Wong L, Kemper P, et al. Comparison of sterile versus nonsterile acellular dermal matrices for breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2013;70:497-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e31827f52c8
  6. Macarios D, Griffin L, Chatterjee A, et al. A meta-analysis assessing postsurgical outcomes between aseptic and sterile AlloDerm regenerative tissue matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2015;3:e409. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000387
  7. Rawlani V, Buck DW 2nd, Johnson SA, et al. Tissue expander breast reconstruction using prehydrated human acellular dermis. Ann Plast Surg 2011;66:593-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181f3ed0a
  8. Hanson SE, Meaike JD, Selber JC, et al. Aseptic freeze-dried versus sterile wet-packaged human cadaveric acellular dermal matrix in immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction: a propensity score analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 141:624e-632e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004323
  9. Sbitany H, Sandeen SN, Amalfi AN, et al. Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction versus complete submuscular coverage: a head-to-head comparison of outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;124:1735-40. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181bf803d
  10. Lee KT, Mun GH. Updated evidence of acellular dermal matrix use for implant-based breast reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2016;23:600-10. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4873-9
  11. Roth JS, Dexter DD, Lumpkins K, et al. Hydrated vs. freeze-dried human acellular dermal matrix for hernia repair: a comparison in a rabbit model. Hernia 2009;13:201-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-008-0453-2
  12. Antony AK, McCarthy CM, Cordeiro PG, et al. Acellular human dermis implantation in 153 immediate two-stage tissue expander breast reconstructions: determining the incidence and significant predictors of complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;125:1606-14. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181d4fb2a
  13. Lanier ST, Wang ED, Chen JJ, et al. The effect of acellular dermal matrix use on complication rates in tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2010;64:674-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/sap.0b013e3181dba892
  14. Chun YS, Verma K, Rosen H, et al. Implant-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix and the risk of postoperative complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;125: 429-36. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181c82d90
  15. Preminger BA, McCarthy CM, Hu QY, et al. The influence of AlloDerm on expander dynamics and complications in the setting of immediate tissue expander/implant reconstruction: a matched-cohort study. Ann Plast Surg 2008;60: 510-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e31816f2836
  16. Kim JY, Davila AA, Persing S, et al. A meta-analysis of human acellular dermis and submuscular tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012;129:28-41. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182361fd6
  17. Bottino MC, Jose MV, Thomas V, et al. Freeze-dried acellular dermal matrix graft: effects of rehydration on physical, chemical, and mechanical properties. Dent Mater 2009;25: 1109-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.03.007
  18. Khansa I, Hendrick RG Jr, Shore A, et al. Breast reconstruction with tissue expanders: implementation of a standardized best-practices protocol to reduce infection rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014;134:11-8.
  19. Weichman KE, Wilson SC, Saadeh PB, et al. Sterile "ready-to-use" AlloDerm decreases postoperative infectious complications in patients undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;132:725-36. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e31829fe35b
  20. Moore MA, Samsell B, Wallis G, et al. Decellularization of human dermis using non-denaturing anionic detergent and endonuclease: a review. Cell Tissue Bank 2015;16:249-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10561-014-9467-4
  21. Lee JH, Park Y, Choi KW, et al. The effect of sterile acellular dermal matrix use on complication rates in implant-based immediate breast reconstructions. Arch Plast Surg 2016;43: 523-8. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.6.523
  22. Venturi ML, Mesbahi AN, Boehmler JH 4th, et al. Evaluating sterile human acellular dermal matrix in immediate expander-based breast reconstruction: a multicenter, prospective, cohort study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131:9e-18e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182729d4f
  23. Bachmann L, Gomes AS, Zezell DM. Collagen absorption bands in heated and rehydrated dentine. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc 2005;62:1045-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2005.03.025
  24. Eppley BL. Experimental assessment of the revascularization of acellular human dermis for soft-tissue augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;107:757-62. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200103000-00016
  25. Goodwin SJ, McCarthy CM, Pusic AL, et al. Complications in smokers after postmastectomy tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2005;55:16-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sap.0000168282.81348.b3

Cited by

  1. In Vitro Analysis of Histology, Mechanics, and Safety of Radiation-free Pre-hydrated Human Acellular Dermal Matrix vol.23, pp.6, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2020.23.e64
  2. The use of human acellular dermal matrices in advanced wound healing and surgical procedures: State of the art vol.34, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/dth.14987
  3. Ice Templating Soft Matter: Fundamental Principles and Fabrication Approaches to Tailor Pore Structure and Morphology and Their Biomedical Applications vol.33, pp.34, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202100091