Cargando…

Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review

Mesh use in surgical breast reconstruction is becoming increasingly common; however, there is still no consensus on whether synthetic matrices or biological matrices produce the best outcomes. This review analyses these outcomes, namely the differences in aesthetic outcomes, cost, and the rates of t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Logan Ellis, Hugh, Asaolu, Oluwatosin, Nebo, Vivien, Kasem, Abdul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4839154/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27102580
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-0874-9
_version_ 1782428103797112832
author Logan Ellis, Hugh
Asaolu, Oluwatosin
Nebo, Vivien
Kasem, Abdul
author_facet Logan Ellis, Hugh
Asaolu, Oluwatosin
Nebo, Vivien
Kasem, Abdul
author_sort Logan Ellis, Hugh
collection PubMed
description Mesh use in surgical breast reconstruction is becoming increasingly common; however, there is still no consensus on whether synthetic matrices or biological matrices produce the best outcomes. This review analyses these outcomes, namely the differences in aesthetic outcomes, cost, and the rates of the most commonly reported complications. The results indicate that breast reconstruction with a synthetic matrix produces comparable aesthetic outcomes to a biological matrix, with lower costs and complication rates. The individual results for complication rates show that biological matrixes are associated with lower infection rates and slightly lower capsular contracture, but higher haematoma rates, and slightly higher rates of skin necrosis and explantation—although many had post-op radiotherapy. The majority of the studies evaluated used biological matrices, and there are no randomised controlled trials directly comparing the two types of meshes; definite conclusions cannot be drawn from the available evidence. The authors suggest that a randomised controlled trial comparing these outcomes in synthetic and biological matrix use is needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12957-016-0874-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4839154
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48391542016-04-22 Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review Logan Ellis, Hugh Asaolu, Oluwatosin Nebo, Vivien Kasem, Abdul World J Surg Oncol Review Mesh use in surgical breast reconstruction is becoming increasingly common; however, there is still no consensus on whether synthetic matrices or biological matrices produce the best outcomes. This review analyses these outcomes, namely the differences in aesthetic outcomes, cost, and the rates of the most commonly reported complications. The results indicate that breast reconstruction with a synthetic matrix produces comparable aesthetic outcomes to a biological matrix, with lower costs and complication rates. The individual results for complication rates show that biological matrixes are associated with lower infection rates and slightly lower capsular contracture, but higher haematoma rates, and slightly higher rates of skin necrosis and explantation—although many had post-op radiotherapy. The majority of the studies evaluated used biological matrices, and there are no randomised controlled trials directly comparing the two types of meshes; definite conclusions cannot be drawn from the available evidence. The authors suggest that a randomised controlled trial comparing these outcomes in synthetic and biological matrix use is needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12957-016-0874-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-04-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4839154/ /pubmed/27102580 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-0874-9 Text en © Logan Ellis et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Review
Logan Ellis, Hugh
Asaolu, Oluwatosin
Nebo, Vivien
Kasem, Abdul
Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review
title Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review
title_full Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review
title_fullStr Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review
title_full_unstemmed Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review
title_short Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review
title_sort biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4839154/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27102580
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-0874-9
work_keys_str_mv AT loganellishugh biologicalandsyntheticmeshuseinbreastreconstructivesurgeryaliteraturereview
AT asaoluoluwatosin biologicalandsyntheticmeshuseinbreastreconstructivesurgeryaliteraturereview
AT nebovivien biologicalandsyntheticmeshuseinbreastreconstructivesurgeryaliteraturereview
AT kasemabdul biologicalandsyntheticmeshuseinbreastreconstructivesurgeryaliteraturereview