A systematic review of complications in prepectoral breast reconstruction

被引:70
|
作者
Wagner, Ryan D. [1 ]
Braun, Tara L. [2 ]
Zhu, Huirong [3 ]
Winocour, Sebastian [1 ]
机构
[1] Baylor Coll Med, Dept Surg, Div Plast Surg, 1977 Butler Blvd,Suite E6-100, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Baylor Coll Med, Dept Dermatol, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[3] Texas Childrens Hosp, Outcome & Impact Serv, Houston, TX 77030 USA
关键词
Capsular contracture; Prepectoral; Acellular dermal matrix; Breast reconstruction; ACELLULAR DERMAL MATRIX; CAPSULAR CONTRACTURE; EXPANDER/IMPLANT RECONSTRUCTION; SUBCUTANEOUS MASTECTOMY; TISSUE MATRIX; SILICONE-GEL; IMPLANT; METAANALYSIS; PLACEMENT; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.bjps.2019.04.005
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
The use of implants for breast reconstruction began over four decades ago, with implants initially placed in the prepectoral space. Concerns arose regarding the high incidence of capsular contracture and complication rates. With the introduction of acellular dermal matrix (ADM), plastic surgeons are again considering the advantages of prepectoral implant placement. A systematic review was conducted to examine complication profiles in prepectoral breast reconstruction alone versus prepectoral with ADM or mesh. A systematic review of the PubMed database was performed from inception to March 2017 to identify literature on postmastectomy patients undergoing prepectoral breast reconstruction with and without ADM or mesh. Study characteristics, complication rates, and outcomes were extracted for analysis. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and complication profiles were analyzed using the random-effects model. Twenty-seven studies met criteria for inclusion out of 550 identified for review. For 1881 total breasts, the complication rate with ADM was 23.4%, while the rate without an additional implant material was 27.5%. The difference in the capsular contracture rate with and without ADM was 2.3% and 12.4%, respectively. The use of ADM in prepectoral breast reconstruction correlated with lower capsular contracture and overall complications rates; however, rates of implant loss, infection, and mastectomy flap necrosis were higher with the use of ADM. Results were variable across studies, and in general, the quality of evidence reported was low. Because the methodology for outcome assessment was inconsistent, there is a need for further investigation with comparative studies and stan-dardized outcome reporting. (C) 2019 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1051 / 1059
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Current Global Trends in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Taj, Saima
    Chandavarkar, Ravi
    Vidya, Raghavan
    MEDICINA-LITHUANIA, 2024, 60 (03):
  • [22] Optimization of Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Cuomo, Roberto
    Giardino, Francesco Ruben
    Neri, Alessandro
    Nisi, Giuseppe
    Brandi, Cesare
    Zerini, Irene
    Jingjian, Han
    Grimaldi, Luca
    BREAST CARE, 2021, 16 (01) : 36 - 42
  • [23] A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Complications Associated With Acellular Dermal Matrix-Assisted Breast Reconstruction
    Ho, Goretti
    Nguyen, T. JoAnna
    Shahabi, Ahva
    Hwang, Brian H.
    Chan, Linda S.
    Wong, Alex K.
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2012, 68 (04) : 346 - 356
  • [24] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: An Overview of the History, Technique, and Reported Complications
    Bloom, Joshua A.
    Patel, Krishnabhai
    Cohen, Stephanie
    Chatterjee, Abhishek
    Homsy, Christopher
    OPEN ACCESS SURGERY, 2020, 13 : 1 - 9
  • [25] The largest multicentre data collection on prepectoral breast reconstruction: The iBAG study
    Masia, Jaume
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 122 (05) : 848 - 860
  • [26] A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prepectoral single-stage breast reconstruction
    Jiameng Liu
    Xiaobin Zheng
    Shunguo Lin
    Hui Han
    Chunsen Xu
    Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022, 30 : 5659 - 5668
  • [27] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Bonomi, Stefano
    Sala, Laura
    Cortinovis, Umberto
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2018, 142 (02) : 232E - 233E
  • [28] Braxon®-assisted prepectoral breast reconstruction: A decade later
    Bassetto, Franco
    Pandis, Laura
    Facchin, Federico
    Azzena, Gian Paolo
    Vindigni, Vincenzo
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2022, 9
  • [29] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Seth, Akhil K.
    Sisco, Mark
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2025, 155 (01) : 213e - 227e
  • [30] Predictive Factors of Capsular Contracture in Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction and its Surgical Approach
    Kim, Si Youn
    Oh, Se Won
    Yang, Eun Jung
    Song, Seung Yong
    Lee, Dong Won
    ARCHIVES OF PLASTIC SURGERY-APS, 2025, 52 (02): : 69 - 75