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
  • [31] Comparative complications of prepectoral versus subpectoral breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis
    Wu, Yongxiao
    Yu, Lizhi
    Huang, Miaoyan
    Huang, Yanping
    Li, Chunyan
    Liang, Yiwen
    Liang, Weiming
    Qin, Tian
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2024, 14
  • [32] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Technical Algorithm
    Liliav, Benjamin
    Patel, Pranjal
    Jacobson, Alice K.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2019, 7 (02)
  • [33] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction in Challenging Patients
    Gabriel, Allen
    Maxwell, G. Patrick
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2017, 140 (06) : 14S - 21S
  • [34] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Growth Story
    Safran, Tyler
    Al-Halabi, Becher
    Dionisopoulos, Tassos
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2019, 144 (03) : 525E - 527E
  • [35] Surgical Outcomes in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Urquia, Lindsey N.
    Hart, Alexandra M.
    Liu, Daniel Z.
    Losken, Albert
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2020, 8 (04)
  • [36] The impact of chemotherapy on prepectoral breast reconstruction
    Palli, D.
    Gardani, M.
    Ambroggi, M.
    Madaro, S.
    Cucchi, M. C.
    Zarabini, A.
    Galluzzo, V.
    Valieri, L.
    Brombin, C.
    Duodeci, S.
    Mella, A.
    Maino, M.
    BREAST, 2023, 68 : S100 - S100
  • [37] How to Optimize Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Graziano, Francis D.
    Henderson, Peter W.
    Jacobs, Jordan
    Salzberg, C. Andrew
    Sbitany, Hani
    AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, 2020, 40 : S22 - S28
  • [38] Do we need acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral breast reconstruction? A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Nolan, Ian T.
    Farajzadeh, Matthew M.
    Boyd, Carter J.
    Bekisz, Jonathan M.
    Gibson, Ella G.
    Salibian, Ara A.
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2023, 86 : 251 - 260
  • [39] Immediate post-mastectomy prepectoral breast reconstruction with animal derived acellular dermal matrices: A systematic review
    Tellarini, Annachiara
    Garutti, Leonardo
    Corno, Martina
    Tamborini, Federico
    Paganini, Ferruccio
    Fasoli, Veronica
    Di Giovanna, Danilo
    Valdatta, Luigi
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2023, 86 : 94 - 108
  • [40] Current Approaches to Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Nahabedian, Maurice Y.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2018, 142 (04) : 871 - 880