Evaluation of post-operative complications and adjuvant treatments following immediate prepectoral versus subpectoral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction without acellular dermal matrix

被引:0
|
作者
Bassi, Romane [1 ]
Jankowski, Clementine [1 ]
Dabajuyo, Sandrine [1 ]
Burnier, Pierre [1 ]
Coutant, Charles [1 ,2 ]
Vincent, Laura [1 ]
机构
[1] Georges Francois Leclerc Canc Ctr, Dept Surg Oncol, 1 Rue Prof Marion, F-21000 Dijon, France
[2] Univ Burgundy, 7 Blvd Jeanne Arc, F-21000 Dijon, France
关键词
Immediate breast reconstruction; Subpectoral implant; Prepectoral implant; Post-operative complications; Adjuvant treatments;
D O I
10.1016/j.bjps.2024.04.0111748-6815
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: In immediate breast reconstruction (IBR), it is unclear whether there is any difference in the complication rates between prepectoral versus subpectoral implant placement without acellular dermal matrix (ADM). Aim: To compare the rates of early post-operative complications and time to initiation of adjuvant treatment in patients undergoing IBR between prepectoral and subpectoral implant placement without ADM for the two surgical procedure. Methods: We retrospectively retrieved data of patients who underwent IBR with prepectoral versus subpectoral implant placement between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2022 in a large cancer center in France. Results: We included 192 patients: 119 in the prepectoral and 73 in the subpectoral group. Their clinical characteristics were similar. Thirty patients (15.6%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, among them 27 (14.1%) received it within 12 weeks, and there was no difference between the groups (p = 0.12). In the prepectoral group, 39 patients (32.8%) received adjuvant radiotherapy versus 5 (6.8%) in the subpectoral group (p < 0.001), but there was no significant difference in time to treatment commencement. Overall, 35 patients (29.4%) in the prepectoral group and 17 (23.3%) in the subpectoral group experienced post-operative complications (p = 0.44). Using multivariable analysis, the only factor associated with post-operative complications was determined to be mastectomy weight (odds ratio 1.98 (1.10-3.59) for weight >= 500 g; p = 0.02). Conclusion: Prepectoral implant placement without ADM can be proposed to patients undergoing IBR with an indication for adjuvant treatment. However, in our study, the reoperation rate with this technique was slightly higher (p = 0.008). This is partly due to the learning curve for surgeons using this new technique. (c) 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons.
引用
收藏
页码:402 / 410
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] 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
  • [42] Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction After Nipple-sparing Mastectomy Through the Inframammary Fold Without Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix: Results of 130 Cases
    Fornazari, Alessandra Cordeiro
    Spautz, Cleverton
    Nissen, Leonardo
    de Lima, Rubens
    Doria, Maira
    Rabinovich, Iris
    Anselmi, Karina
    Schunemann, Eduardo, Jr.
    Kuroda, Flavia
    Urban, Cicero
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 27 (SUPPL 2) : S516 - S518
  • [43] Early Complications after Prepectoral Tissue Expander Placement in Breast Reconstruction with and without Acellular Dermal Matrix
    Pires, Giovanna
    Marquez, Jessica L.
    Memmott, Stanley
    Sudduth, Jack D.
    Moss, Whitney
    Eddington, Devin
    Hobson, Gregory
    Tuncer, Fatma
    Agarwal, Jayant P.
    Kwok, Alvin C.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2024, 153 (06) : 1221 - 1229
  • [44] Comparing Polyurethane and Acellular Dermal Matrix Implant Cover in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: Short-term Complications
    Correia-Pinto, Jorge M.
    Poleri, Filipa
    Barbosa, Jose P.
    Casimiro, Rui
    Azevedo, Marta S.
    Andresen, Carolina
    Coelho, Gustavo
    Cunha, Cristina S.
    Costa, Horacio
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2023, 11 (02) : E4798
  • [45] 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.
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2013, 71 (05) : 464 - 470
  • [46] Acellular dermal matrix in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction: univariate and multivariate analysis on potential risk factors
    Hansen, Laura
    Paulsen, Jakob Felbo
    Hemmingsen, Mathilde Nejrup
    Herly, Mikkel
    Bredgaard, Rikke
    Gramkow, Christina S.
    Vester-Glowinski, Peter Viktor
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2024, 47 (01)
  • [47] Two-stage expander/implant breast reconstruction versus prepectoral breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: a cost analysis
    Innocenti, Alessandro
    Melita, Dario
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2022, 45 (04) : 601 - 615
  • [48] Best-BRA (Is subpectoral or prepectoral implant placement best in immediate breast reconstruction?): a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of subpectoral versus prepectoral immediate implant-based breast reconstruction in women following mastectomy
    Roberts, Kirsty
    Mills, Nicola
    Metcalfe, Chris
    Lane, Athene
    Clement, Clare
    Hollingworth, William
    Taylor, Jodi
    Holcombe, Chris
    Skillman, Joanna
    Fairhurst, Katherine
    Whisker, Lisa
    Cutress, Ramsey
    Thrush, Steven
    Fairbrother, Patricia
    Potter, Shelley
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (11):
  • [49] Two-stage expander/implant breast reconstruction versus prepectoral breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: a cost analysis
    Alessandro Innocenti
    Dario Melita
    European Journal of Plastic Surgery, 2022, 45 : 601 - 615
  • [50] Drainage and seroma formation according to the size of sterile acellular dermal matrix in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction
    Kong, Tae Hyun
    Kim, Taegon
    Lee, Jun-Ho
    ARCHIVES OF AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2022, 28 (04): : 130 - 134