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
  • [41] The Failed Breast Implant in Postmastectomy Reconstruction A Systematic Literature Review of Complications of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
    Bucher, Florian
    Vogt, Peter M.
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2022, 88 (06) : 695 - 703
  • [42] Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: The Breast Surgeon's Perspective
    Storm-Dickerson, Toni
    Sigalove, Noemi
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2017, 140 (06) : 43S - 48S
  • [43] The breast surgeons' approach to mastectomy and prepectoral breast reconstruction
    Storm-Dickerson, Toni
    Sigalove, Noemi M.
    GLAND SURGERY, 2019, 8 (01) : 27 - 35
  • [44] Immediate Symmetrization of the Contralateral Breast in Breast Reconstruction-Revision, Complications, and Satisfaction: A Systematic Review
    Alqhtani, Abdullh
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2024, 12 (02) : E5586
  • [45] Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant versus Staged Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: A Comparison of Complications
    Finkelstein, Emily R.
    Laureano, Natalia Vidal
    Azizi, Armina
    Smartz, Taylor
    Zheng, Caiwei
    Lessard, Anne-Sophie
    Panthaki, Zubin
    Oeltjen, John
    Kassira, Wrood
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2024, 154 (02) : 224e - 232e
  • [46] Current Global Trends in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Taj, Saima
    Chandavarkar, Ravi
    Vidya, Raghavan
    MEDICINA-LITHUANIA, 2024, 60 (03):
  • [47] Important Considerations for Performing Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Sbitany, Hani
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2017, 140 (06) : 7S - 13S
  • [48] Invited Response on: Postoperative Complications Following Prepectoral Versus Partial Subpectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using ADM: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Liwen Zhu
    Chunjun Liu
    Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 2024, 48 : 15 - 16
  • [49] Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction after Nipple-sparing Mastectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Nolan, Ian T.
    Farajzadeh, Matthew M.
    Bekisz, Jonathan M.
    Boyd, Carter J.
    Gibson, Ella G.
    Salibian, Ara A.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2024, 12 (05)
  • [50] Invited Response on: Postoperative Complications Following Prepectoral Versus Partial Subpectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using ADM: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Zhu, Liwen
    Liu, Chunjun
    AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2024, 48 (01) : 15 - 16