Cargando…
Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix
BACKGROUND: Single‐stage reconstruction is used widely after mastectomy. Prepectoral implant placement is a relatively new technique. This multicentre audit examined surgical outcomes following prepectoral reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix (ADM). METHODS: All patients who had a mastectomy...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6996627/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32011819 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50236 |
_version_ | 1783493542086180864 |
---|---|
author | Chandarana, M. Harries, S. |
author_facet | Chandarana, M. Harries, S. |
author_sort | Chandarana, M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Single‐stage reconstruction is used widely after mastectomy. Prepectoral implant placement is a relatively new technique. This multicentre audit examined surgical outcomes following prepectoral reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix (ADM). METHODS: All patients who had a mastectomy with prepectoral breast reconstruction and ADM in the participating centres between January 2015 and December 2017 were included. Demographic and treatment details, and short‐ and long‐term operative outcomes were recorded. Factors affecting complications and implant loss were analysed: age, BMI, smoking status, diabetes, vascular disease, laterality of surgery, previous ipsilateral breast surgery or radiotherapy, indication for surgery (invasive versus in situ carcinoma, or risk reduction), type of mastectomy, axillary clearance, breast volume, implant volume, and neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 406 reconstructions were performed across 18 centres. Median follow‐up was 9·65 months. Median hospital stay was 1 day. The 90‐day unplanned readmission rate was 15·7 per cent, and the return‐to‐theatre rate 16·7 per cent. Some 15·3 per cent of patients had a major complication, with a 90‐day implant loss rate of 4·9 per cent. A further six patients had delayed implant loss. In multivariable analysis, no factor was significantly associated with complications or implant loss. CONCLUSION: Prepectoral breast reconstruction with ADM has satisfactory surgical outcomes. The duration of follow‐up needs to be extended to examine outcomes in patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6996627 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69966272020-02-05 Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix Chandarana, M. Harries, S. BJS Open Original Articles BACKGROUND: Single‐stage reconstruction is used widely after mastectomy. Prepectoral implant placement is a relatively new technique. This multicentre audit examined surgical outcomes following prepectoral reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix (ADM). METHODS: All patients who had a mastectomy with prepectoral breast reconstruction and ADM in the participating centres between January 2015 and December 2017 were included. Demographic and treatment details, and short‐ and long‐term operative outcomes were recorded. Factors affecting complications and implant loss were analysed: age, BMI, smoking status, diabetes, vascular disease, laterality of surgery, previous ipsilateral breast surgery or radiotherapy, indication for surgery (invasive versus in situ carcinoma, or risk reduction), type of mastectomy, axillary clearance, breast volume, implant volume, and neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 406 reconstructions were performed across 18 centres. Median follow‐up was 9·65 months. Median hospital stay was 1 day. The 90‐day unplanned readmission rate was 15·7 per cent, and the return‐to‐theatre rate 16·7 per cent. Some 15·3 per cent of patients had a major complication, with a 90‐day implant loss rate of 4·9 per cent. A further six patients had delayed implant loss. In multivariable analysis, no factor was significantly associated with complications or implant loss. CONCLUSION: Prepectoral breast reconstruction with ADM has satisfactory surgical outcomes. The duration of follow‐up needs to be extended to examine outcomes in patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2019-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6996627/ /pubmed/32011819 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50236 Text en © 2019 The Authors. BJS Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJS Society Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Chandarana, M. Harries, S. Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix |
title | Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix |
title_full | Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix |
title_fullStr | Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix |
title_full_unstemmed | Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix |
title_short | Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix |
title_sort | multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6996627/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32011819 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50236 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chandaranam multicentrestudyofprepectoralbreastreconstructionusingacellulardermalmatrix AT harriess multicentrestudyofprepectoralbreastreconstructionusingacellulardermalmatrix AT multicentrestudyofprepectoralbreastreconstructionusingacellulardermalmatrix |