Acellular Dermal Matrix-Associated Complications in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Two Human Tissues

被引:26
作者
Broyles, Justin M.
Liao, Eric C.
Kim, John
Heistein, Jonathan
Sisco, Mark
Karp, Nolan
Lau, Frank H.
Chun, Yoon S.
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[3] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Evanston, IL 60208 USA
[4] Texas Hlth Harris Methodist Hosp Southlake, Southlake, TX USA
[5] Texas Hlth Harris Methodist Hosp Ft Worth, Ft Worth, TX USA
[6] Baylor Scott & White All St Med Ctr, Ft Worth, TX USA
[7] NorthShore Univ Hlth Syst, Evanston, IL USA
[8] NYU, Sch Med, New York, NY 10003 USA
[9] Louisiana State Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr New Orleans, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA
基金
美国医疗保健研究与质量局;
关键词
ALLODERM; METAANALYSIS; INFECTION; FLEXHD;
D O I
10.1097/PRS.0000000000008194
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Implant-based breast reconstruction accounts for the vast majority of breast reconstruction procedures and is commonly performed with human acellular dermal matrix. There is no consensus as to the optimal human acellular dermal matrix preparation, and high-quality evidence concerning comparative effectiveness is lacking. This study is the first prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial to compare human acellular dermal matrix-related complications of the two most commonly used human acellular dermal matrices in implant-based breast reconstruction. The authors hypothesize that there will be no difference in infection, seroma, and reconstructive failure between FlexHD Pliable and AlloDerm RTU. Methods: The authors conducted a Level 1 prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial to assess complications associated with the use of two human acellular dermal matrices in immediate postmastectomy implant-based breast reconstruction across seven clinical sites. Group A patients received FlexHD Pliable (113 patients with 187 breast reconstructions), and group B patients received AlloDerm RTU (117 patients with 197 breast reconstructions). Results: There was no significant difference with respect to patient demographics, indications, comorbidities, and reconstruction approach between groups. Mean follow-up time was 10.7 +/- 3.2 months. There was no statistical difference in the overall matrix-related complications between groups A and B (4.3 percent versus 7.1 percent, p = 0.233). Obesity (OR, 1.14; 95 percent CI, 1.05 to 1.24; p = 0.001) and prepectoral placement of matrix (OR, 4.53; 95 percent CI, 1.82 to 11.3; p = 0.001) were independently associated with greater risks of overall matrix-related complications. Conclusion: This work supports the use of human acellular dermal matrices in implant-based breast reconstruction and demonstrates no significant difference in matrix-related complication rates between FlexHD Pliable and AlloDerm RTU. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, I.
引用
收藏
页码:493 / 500
页数:8
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] Meta-analysis of prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: guide to patient selection and current outcomes
    Abbate, Olivia
    Rosado, Nikki
    Sobti, Nikhil
    Vieira, Brittany L.
    Liao, Eric C.
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2020, 182 (03) : 543 - 554
  • [2] American Society of Plastic Surgeons,, 2019, 2019 PLAST SURG STAT
  • [3] Immediate bilateral breast reconstruction with implants and inferolateral AlloDerm slings
    Breuing, KH
    Warren, SM
    [J]. ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2005, 55 (03) : 232 - 239
  • [4] Complications in Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction A Comparison of AlloDerm, DermaMatrix, and FlexHD Acellular Inferior Pole Dermal Slings
    Brooke, Sebastian
    Mesa, John
    Uluer, Mehmet
    Michelotti, Brett
    Moyer, Kurtis
    Neves, Rogerio I.
    Mackay, Donald
    Potochny, John
    [J]. ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2012, 69 (04) : 347 - 349
  • [5] Chikodi A., 2020, BREAST IMPLANTS RECO
  • [6] Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using Acellular Dermal Matrix and the Risk of Postoperative Complications
    Chun, Yoon S.
    Verma, Kapil
    Rosen, Heather
    Lipsitz, Stuart
    Morris, Donald
    Kenney, Pardon
    Eriksson, Elof
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2010, 125 (02) : 429 - 436
  • [7] Retrospective Review of 331 Consecutive Immediate Single-Stage Implant Reconstructions with Acellular Dermal Matrix: Indications, Complications, Trends, and Costs
    Colwell, Amy S.
    Damjanovic, Branimir
    Zahedi, Bita
    Medford-Davis, Laura
    Hertl, Catherine
    Austen, William G., Jr.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2011, 128 (06) : 1170 - 1178
  • [8] Cost and Outcome Analysis of Breast Reconstruction Paradigm Shift
    Fitzpatrick, Aisling M.
    Gao, Lin Lin
    Smith, Barbara L.
    Cetrulo, Curtis L., Jr.
    Colwell, Amy S.
    Winograd, Jonathan M.
    Yaremchuk, Michael J.
    Austen, William G., Jr.
    Liao, Eric C.
    [J]. ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2014, 73 (02) : 141 - 149
  • [9] Minimizing Complications With the Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix for Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
    Ganske, Ingrid
    Verma, Kapil
    Rosen, Heather
    Eriksson, Elof
    Chun, Yoon S.
    [J]. ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2013, 71 (05) : 464 - 470
  • [10] Assessment of Patient Factors, Surgeons, and Surgeon Teams in Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Outcomes
    Gfrerer, Lisa
    Mattos, David
    Mastroianni, Melissa
    Weng, Qing Y.
    Ricci, Joseph A.
    Heath, Martha P.
    Lin, Alex
    Specht, Michelle C.
    Haynes, Alex B.
    Austen, William G., Jr.
    Liao, Eric C.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2015, 135 (02) : 245E - 252E