Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2020.01207

Outcome of complete acellular dermal matrix wrap with polyurethane implant in immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction  

Naemonitou, Foteini (Oncoplastic Breast, Department of General Surgery, The Royal of Wolverhampton NHS Trust)
Mylvaganam, Senthurun (Oncoplastic Breast, Department of General Surgery, The Royal of Wolverhampton NHS Trust)
Salem, Fathi (Oncoplastic Breast, Department of General Surgery, The Royal of Wolverhampton NHS Trust)
Vidya, Raghavan (Oncoplastic Breast, Department of General Surgery, The Royal of Wolverhampton NHS Trust)
Publication Information
Archives of Plastic Surgery / v.47, no.6, 2020 , pp. 567-573 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background Polyurethane implants have been used on and off in breast reconstruction since 1991 while prepectoral breast reconstruction has gained popularity in recent times. In this study, we present our outcomes from the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) complete wrap with polyurethane implants in prepectoral breast reconstruction. Methods This is a retrospective review of prospectively maintained database from 41 patients receiving complete ADM wrap with prepectoral polyurethane implants over a 3-year period. Selection criteria were adapted from a previous study (4135 Trust Clinical Audit Database) evaluating prepectoral reconstruction with Braxon matrices. Patient demographics, operative data, surgical complications, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results A total of 52 implant reconstructions were performed in 41 patients with a mean follow-up of 14.3 months (range, 6-36 months). The overall reported complication rates including early (less than 6 weeks) and late complications. Early complications included two patients (4.9%) with wound dehiscence. One of which had an implant loss that was salvageable. Another patient (2%) developed red-breast syndrome and two women (4.9%) developed with seroma treated conservatively. Late complications included one patient (2%) with grade II capsular contraction, 12 patients with grade I-II rippling and two patients (4.9%) with grade III rippling. Conclusions We present our experience of prepectoral polyurethane implant using complete ADM wrap. This is one of the few papers to report on the outcome of the prepectoral use of polyurethane in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction. Our early observational series show satisfactory outcome and long-term results are warranted by a large multicenter study.
Keywords
Polyurethane; Implant capsular contracture; Breast implants; Acellular dermal matrix;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Robertson SA, Rusby JE, Cutress RI. Determinants of optimal mastectomy skin flap thickness. Br J Surg 2014;101: 899-911.   DOI
2 Liliav B, Patel P, Jacobson AK. Prepectoral breast reconstruction: a technical algorithm. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019;7:e2107.   DOI
3 Abdelhamid MI, Alkilany MM, Lotfy M. Pectoral fascia preservation during modified radical mastectomy: why and when. Egypt J Surg 2017;36:333-5.   DOI
4 Caputo GG, Marchetti A, Dalla Pozza E, et al. Skin-reduction breast reconstructions with prepectoral implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016;137:1702-5.   DOI
5 Thuman J, Freitas AM, Schaeffer C, et al. Prepectoral wise-pattern staged implant-based breast reconstruction for obese or ptotic patients. Ann Plast Surg 2019;82(6S Suppl 5):S404-9.   DOI
6 Vidya R, Berna G, Sbitany H, et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: a joint consensus guide from UK, European and USA breast and plastic reconstructive surgeons. Ecancermedicalscience 2019;13:927.
7 Potter S, Conroy EJ, Cutress RI, et al. Short-term safety outcomes of mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with and without mesh (iBRA): a multicentre, prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2019;20:254-66.   DOI
8 de Vita R, Buccheri EM, Villanucci A, et al. Breast reconstruction actualized in nipple-sparing mastectomy and direct-to-implant, prepectoral polyurethane positioning: early experience and preliminary results. Clin Breast Cancer 2019;19:e358-63.   DOI
9 Ksander GA, Gray L. Reduced capsule formation around soft silicone rubber prostheses coated with solid collagen. Ann Plast Surg 1985;14:351-60.   DOI
10 Komorowska-Timek E, Oberg KC, Timek TA, et al. The effect of AlloDerm envelopes on periprosthetic capsule formation with and without radiation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;123:807-16.   DOI
11 Frame JD. The arguments for polyurethane covered breast implants in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery. PMFA News 2014;1:20-2.
12 Schmitz M, Bertram M, Kneser U, et al. Experimental total wrapping of breast implants with acellular dermal matrix: a preventive tool against capsular contracture in breast surgery? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013;66:1382-9.   DOI
13 Headon H, Kasem A, Mokbel K. Capsular contracture after breast augmentation: an update for clinical practice. Arch Plast Surg 2015;42:532-43.   DOI
14 Duxbury PJ, Harvey JR. Systematic review of the effectiveness of polyurethane-coated compared with textured silicone implants in breast surgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2016;69:452-60.   DOI
15 Pompei S, Arelli F, Labardi L, et al. Breast reconstruction with polyurethane implants: preliminary report. Eur J Plast Surg 2011;35:441-7.   DOI
16 Vidya R, Iqbal FM, Becker H, et al. Rippling associated with pre-pectoral implant based breast reconstruction: a new grading system. World J Plast Surg 2019;8:311-5.
17 Castel N, Soon-Sutton T, Deptula P, et al. Polyurethane-coated breast implants revisited: a 30-year follow-up. Arch Plast Surg 2015;42:186-93.   DOI
18 Elswick SM, Harless CA, Bishop SN, et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with postmastectomy radiation therapy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018;142:1-12.   DOI
19 Vidya R, Iqbal FM. A guide to prepectoral breast reconstruction: a new dimension to implant-based breast reconstruction. Clin Breast Cancer 2017;17:266-71.   DOI
20 Oliver JD, Boczar D, Huayllani MT, et al. Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) before and after 2-stage expander-implant breast reconstruction: a systematic review. Medicina (Kaunas) 2019;55:226.   DOI
21 Reitsamer R, Peintinger F. Prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with porcine acellular dermal matrix: a new technique for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2015;68:162-7.   DOI
22 Van Zele D, Heymans O. Breast implants: a review. Acta Chir Belg 2004;104:158-65.   DOI
23 Medtech Insight. Bristol-Myers Squibb polyurethane-coated breast implant study [Internet]. Tustin, CA: Medtech Insight; c1993 [cited 2019 Aug 15]. Available from: https://medtech.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/MT001252/BRISTOLMYERS-SQUIBB-POLYURETHANECOATED-BREAST-IMPLANT-STUDY.
24 Spear SL, Parikh PM, Goldstein JA. History of breast implants and the food and drug administration. Clin Plast Surg 2009;36:15-21.   DOI
25 Vidya R, Masia J, Cawthorn S, et al Evaluation of the effectiveness of the prepectoral breast reconstruction with Braxon dermal matrix: first multicenter European report on 100 cases. Breast J 2017;23:670-6.   DOI