Use of partial acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral nipple-sparing mastectomy

被引:0
|
作者
Rowley, Mallory [1 ]
Chernov, Evan [1 ]
Dogaroiu, Anca [1 ]
Upadhyaya, Prashant [1 ]
机构
[1] SUNY Upstate Med Univ, Syracuse, NY 13210 USA
关键词
Breast reconstruction; Acellular dermal matrix; Mastectomy; IMPLANT BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; CAPSULAR CONTRACTURE; TISSUE EXPANDER; COST-ANALYSIS; SINGLE-STAGE; METAANALYSIS; COVERAGE; RISK;
D O I
10.1007/s00238-025-02285-7
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundThe nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) offers a reconstruction option to patients who wish for a more subtle scar pattern and to retain their native nipple-areolar complex. Traditionally used acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been linked to potential complications including seroma, hematoma, and infection, as well as increased operative costs. Our study examines whether using partial ADM to cover the lower pole of the breast implant during NSM prepectoral reconstruction offers comparable, or even better, rates of postoperative complications while minimizing operative costs.MethodsA retrospective chart review of patients who underwent prepectoral nipple-sparing implant-based reconstruction (IBR) using partial ADM (June 2019 - October 2020) was performed. Demographic, perioperative, and post-operative complication information was collected and described using means, standard deviations, and frequencies.ResultsNinety-eight patients (183 breasts) met inclusion criteria, with smoking history (36.73%), prior breast surgery (18.58%), and obesity (18.37%) cited as the most common comorbidities. 12.57% of patients experienced a complication following stage one of reconstruction, with infection as the most common complication (5.46%). Complication rate following stage two was 7.10%, with dehiscence cited as the most common complication (4.92%).ConclusionsThe average cost of ADM for breast reconstruction is upwards of $5,000. While our institution does not utilize full ADM coverage in NSMs, historical trends in the literature demonstrate overall complication rates of 5.9% to as high as 35%. Our study demonstrates that utilizing partial ADM coverage in the setting of NSM offers comparable, if not lower, complication rates at a fraction of the cost.Level of Evidence: Level III, risk/prognostic study.ConclusionsThe average cost of ADM for breast reconstruction is upwards of $5,000. While our institution does not utilize full ADM coverage in NSMs, historical trends in the literature demonstrate overall complication rates of 5.9% to as high as 35%. Our study demonstrates that utilizing partial ADM coverage in the setting of NSM offers comparable, if not lower, complication rates at a fraction of the cost.Level of Evidence: Level III, risk/prognostic study.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Immediate Prepectoral Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrix Is Equally Safe Following Skin-Sparing and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
    Henry, Nader
    Sebag, Victoria
    Safran, Tyler
    Viezel-Mathieu, Alex
    Dionisopoulos, Tassos
    Davison, Peter
    Vorstenbosch, Joshua
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2024, 93 (02) : 172 - 177
  • [2] To acellular dermal matrix or not to acellular dermal matrix?- outcomes of pre-pectoral prosthetic reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy with and without acellular dermal matrix
    Bushong, Elizabeth E.
    Wesely, Nicholas
    Komorowska-Timek, Ewa
    GLAND SURGERY, 2024, 13 (06) : 885 - 896
  • [3] Staged Suprapectoral Expander/Implant Reconstruction without Acellular Dermal Matrix following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
    Salibian, Arthur H.
    Harness, Jay K.
    Mowlds, Donald S.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2017, 139 (01) : 30 - 39
  • [4] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Mastopexy
    Manrique, Oscar J.
    Arif, Chaudhry
    Banuelos, Joseph
    Abu-Ghname, Amjed
    Martinez-Jorge, Jorys
    Tran, Nho, V
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2020, 85 (01) : 18 - 23
  • [5] Prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with porcine acellular dermal matrix: A new technique for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy
    Reitsamer, Roland
    Peintinger, Florentia
    Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, 2015, 68 (02) : 162 - 167
  • [6] Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
    Spear, Scott L.
    Hannan, Catherine M.
    Willey, Shawna C.
    Cocilovo, Costanza
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2009, 123 (06) : 1665 - 1673
  • [7] Minimizing Nipple-Areolar Complex Complications in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
    Perez-Otero, Sofia
    Hemal, Kshipra
    Boyd, Carter J.
    Kabir, Raeesa
    Sorenson, Thomas J.
    Jacobson, Alexis
    Thanik, Vishal D.
    Levine, Jamie P.
    Cohen, Oriana D.
    Karp, Nolan S.
    Choi, Mihye
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2024, 92 (4S) : S179 - S184
  • [8] Ptotic versus Nonptotic Breasts in Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Ostapenko, Edvin
    Nixdorf, Larissa
    Devyatko, Yelena
    Exner, Ruth
    Math, Pia
    Wimmer, Kerstin
    Haeusler, Theresa
    Fitzal, Florian
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2023, 11 (05) : e5032
  • [9] Nipple sparing mastectomy with prepectoral immediate prosthetic reconstruction without acellular dermal matrices: a single center experience
    Scardina, Lorenzo
    Di Leone, Alba
    Sanchez, Alejandro M.
    D'Archi, Sabatino
    Biondi, Ersilia
    Franco, Antonio
    Mason, Elena J.
    Magno, Stefano
    Terribile, Daniela
    Barone-Adesi, Liliana
    Visconti, Giuseppe
    Salgarello, Marzia
    Masetti, Riccardo
    Franceschini, Gianluca
    MINERVA SURGERY, 2021, 76 (06): : 498 - 505
  • [10] Duoderm®-Bra for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
    Dayicioglu, Deniz
    Trotta, Rose
    Agoris, Corin
    Kumar, Ambuj
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2016, 76 : S280 - S285