Cargando…

Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral?

BACKGROUND: Skin-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate implant-based breast reconstruction is a commonly used treatment for breast cancer. However, when placing the implant in a subpectoral pocket, a high incidence of breast animation deformity (BAD) has been reported. Besides the nuisance that B...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dyrberg, Diana L., Gunnarsson, Gudjon L., Bille, Camilla, Sørensen, Jens A., Thomsen, Jørn B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7011213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32041661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4125-6
_version_ 1783496025576570880
author Dyrberg, Diana L.
Gunnarsson, Gudjon L.
Bille, Camilla
Sørensen, Jens A.
Thomsen, Jørn B.
author_facet Dyrberg, Diana L.
Gunnarsson, Gudjon L.
Bille, Camilla
Sørensen, Jens A.
Thomsen, Jørn B.
author_sort Dyrberg, Diana L.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Skin-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate implant-based breast reconstruction is a commonly used treatment for breast cancer. However, when placing the implant in a subpectoral pocket, a high incidence of breast animation deformity (BAD) has been reported. Besides the nuisance that BAD can cause, lifting of the pectoralis major muscle (PMM) can result in a more extended postoperative recovery period. When placing the implant solely prepectorally leaving the PMM undisturbed, the incidence and severity of BAD might be mitigated. However, new challenges may occur because of thinner skin cover. METHODS/DESIGN: A prospective, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial will be carried out with the primary aim of assessing and comparing the incidence and degree of BAD in women having a direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with either a prepectorally or a subpectorally placed implant. The secondary outcomes are shoulder and arm function, quality of life, aesthetic evaluation, length of stay, complications, need for surgical corrections, and development of capsular contracture. A total of 70 included patients will be followed under admittance and at clinical check-ups 3 months and 1 year after surgery. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this trial is the first randomised controlled trial evaluating and comparing subpectoral and prepectoral implant placement when performing direct-to-implant breast reconstruction following skin-sparing mastectomy. The results will hopefully provide us with a broader knowledge of the outcomes of immediate breast reconstruction, making better preoperative planning possible in the future by providing our patients with a more objective information. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03143335. Prospectively registered on 8 May 2017.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7011213
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70112132020-02-13 Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral? Dyrberg, Diana L. Gunnarsson, Gudjon L. Bille, Camilla Sørensen, Jens A. Thomsen, Jørn B. Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Skin-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate implant-based breast reconstruction is a commonly used treatment for breast cancer. However, when placing the implant in a subpectoral pocket, a high incidence of breast animation deformity (BAD) has been reported. Besides the nuisance that BAD can cause, lifting of the pectoralis major muscle (PMM) can result in a more extended postoperative recovery period. When placing the implant solely prepectorally leaving the PMM undisturbed, the incidence and severity of BAD might be mitigated. However, new challenges may occur because of thinner skin cover. METHODS/DESIGN: A prospective, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial will be carried out with the primary aim of assessing and comparing the incidence and degree of BAD in women having a direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with either a prepectorally or a subpectorally placed implant. The secondary outcomes are shoulder and arm function, quality of life, aesthetic evaluation, length of stay, complications, need for surgical corrections, and development of capsular contracture. A total of 70 included patients will be followed under admittance and at clinical check-ups 3 months and 1 year after surgery. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this trial is the first randomised controlled trial evaluating and comparing subpectoral and prepectoral implant placement when performing direct-to-implant breast reconstruction following skin-sparing mastectomy. The results will hopefully provide us with a broader knowledge of the outcomes of immediate breast reconstruction, making better preoperative planning possible in the future by providing our patients with a more objective information. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03143335. Prospectively registered on 8 May 2017. BioMed Central 2020-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7011213/ /pubmed/32041661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4125-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 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 Study Protocol
Dyrberg, Diana L.
Gunnarsson, Gudjon L.
Bille, Camilla
Sørensen, Jens A.
Thomsen, Jørn B.
Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral?
title Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral?
title_full Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral?
title_fullStr Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral?
title_full_unstemmed Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral?
title_short Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral?
title_sort direct-to-implant extracellular matrix hammock-based breast reconstruction; prepectoral or subpectoral?
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7011213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32041661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4125-6
work_keys_str_mv AT dyrbergdianal directtoimplantextracellularmatrixhammockbasedbreastreconstructionprepectoralorsubpectoral
AT gunnarssongudjonl directtoimplantextracellularmatrixhammockbasedbreastreconstructionprepectoralorsubpectoral
AT billecamilla directtoimplantextracellularmatrixhammockbasedbreastreconstructionprepectoralorsubpectoral
AT sørensenjensa directtoimplantextracellularmatrixhammockbasedbreastreconstructionprepectoralorsubpectoral
AT thomsenjørnb directtoimplantextracellularmatrixhammockbasedbreastreconstructionprepectoralorsubpectoral