TITLE:
Lessons Learned from Three Different Acellular Dermal Matrices in Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction
AUTHORS:
Claas Spengler, Roland Mett, Frank Masberg, Peter M. Vogt, Tobias R. Mett
KEYWORDS:
Breast Reconstruction, Acellular Dermal Matrix, ADM, Direct-to-Implant, DTI, Immediate Breast Reconstruction, IBR, Breast Cancer, Skin Sparing Mastectomy, EPIFLEX, Strattice, BRAXON
JOURNAL NAME:
Modern Plastic Surgery,
Vol.11 No.1,
January
13,
2021
ABSTRACT: The aim of the study was to show significant differences regarding postoperative complications and outcomes using three different Acellular Dermal Matrices (ADM), namely Epiflex®, Strattice® and Braxon®, in immediate implant-based subpectoral breast reconstruction cases. Background: The use of Acellular Dermal Matrices for implant-based breast reconstruction cases continues to evolve. There is a wide variety of products which differ significantly in their biological features. It remains unclear if and how these differences manifest in clinical practice. Methods: 82 cases of primary breast reconstruction in the Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery of HELIOS Clinics Schwerin, Germany between 2010 and 2018 were analyzed. 25 patients received Strattice® acellular dermal matrix (SADM), 22 cases Epiflex® acellular dermal matrix (EADM) and the remaining 35 cases Braxon® acellular dermal matrix (BADM). The mean follow-up was 1.8 years. Cases were analyzed regarding minor or major complications and rate of capsular contracture grade III or IV (Baker Classification). Results: The overall complication rate was 34.1% for all groups (SADM = 40%, EADM = 50%, BADM = 20%, p-value = 0.051). Of all cases, 6 patients underwent implant exchange or secondary autologous reconstruction due to capsular contracture (7.3%). The mean time between revision due to capsular contracture and reconstruction was 35.8 ± 14.4 months. 50% of patients, who developed capsular contracture, received postoperative radiation. Mean hospitalization time was 8.2 ± 3 days (SADM = 8 ± 3.2 days, EADM = 10 ± 2.8 days, BADM = 6 ± 1.3 days). There were no significant differences between all three groups for demographics, overall complication rate or capsular contracture. However, patients receiving Braxon® matrix showed significantly fewer minor complications (p-value = 0.01). Moreover, patients receiving Braxon® ADM showed a significantly lower time of hospitalization (p Conclusion: No significant differences regarding the overall complication rate were found between the three groups. Different biological features of ADM showed a weak influence on overall results. However, patients receiving Braxon® ADM showed significantly lower minor complication rates and hospitalization time. In addition, these matrices showed a trend towards lower capsular contracture rates. The low rate of capsular contracture hints at possible advantages of ADM-use in direct-to-implant cases.