Archives of Plastic Surgery

  • 제47권6호
  • /
  • Pages.567-573
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 2234-6163(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-6171(eISSN)
대한성형외과학회 (Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

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)
  • 투고 : 2020.06.26
  • 심사 : 2020.10.06
  • 발행 : 2020.11.15
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

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.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2016.11.009
  2. 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. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55060226
  3. Elswick SM, Harless CA, Bishop SN, et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with postmastectomy radiation therapy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018;142:1-12. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004453
  4. 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. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2015.42.2.186
  5. Van Zele D, Heymans O. Breast implants: a review. Acta Chir Belg 2004;104:158-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00015458.2004.11679528
  6. 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.
  7. Spear SL, Parikh PM, Goldstein JA. History of breast implants and the food and drug administration. Clin Plast Surg 2009;36:15-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2008.07.007
  8. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.10.012
  9. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12810
  10. Robertson SA, Rusby JE, Cutress RI. Determinants of optimal mastectomy skin flap thickness. Br J Surg 2014;101: 899-911. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9470
  11. Liliav B, Patel P, Jacobson AK. Prepectoral breast reconstruction: a technical algorithm. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019;7:e2107. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002107
  12. Abdelhamid MI, Alkilany MM, Lotfy M. Pectoral fascia preservation during modified radical mastectomy: why and when. Egypt J Surg 2017;36:333-5. https://doi.org/10.4103/ejs.ejs_23_17
  13. Caputo GG, Marchetti A, Dalla Pozza E, et al. Skin-reduction breast reconstructions with prepectoral implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016;137:1702-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000002227
  14. 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. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001791
  15. 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.
  16. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30781-2
  17. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2018.12.015
  18. Ksander GA, Gray L. Reduced capsule formation around soft silicone rubber prostheses coated with solid collagen. Ann Plast Surg 1985;14:351-60. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000637-198504000-00009
  19. 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. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318199eef3
  20. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2013.05.020
  21. Headon H, Kasem A, Mokbel K. Capsular contracture after breast augmentation: an update for clinical practice. Arch Plast Surg 2015;42:532-43. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2015.42.5.532
  22. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2016.01.013
  23. Frame JD. The arguments for polyurethane covered breast implants in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery. PMFA News 2014;1:20-2.
  24. Pompei S, Arelli F, Labardi L, et al. Breast reconstruction with polyurethane implants: preliminary report. Eur J Plast Surg 2011;35:441-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-011-0612-z
  25. 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.

피인용 문헌

  1. A Brief Introduction to the Polyurethanes According to the Principles of Green Chemistry vol.9, pp.11, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9111929