Attenuating Chronic Fibrosis: Decreasing Foreign Body Response with Acellular Dermal Matrix.

Breast cancer is the world's most prevalent cancer, and many breast cancer patients undergo mastectomy as the choice of treatment, often with post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) use has become a method to improve outcomes of reconstruction for these patients. We aimed to compare postoperative complications and patient-reported outcomes, which are still poorly characterized, between groups utilizing acellular dermal matrix during reconstruction and those without. We searched electronic databases from inception to 16 June 2022 for randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies comparing the outcomes of patients who have and have not received acellular dermal matrix in implant-based breast reconstruction. The results were quantitatively combined and analyzed using random-effects models. A total of nine studies were included, representing 3161 breasts. There was no significant difference in postoperative outcomes, such as seroma formation (p = 0.51), hematomas (p = 0.20), infections (p = 0.21), wound dehiscence (p = 0.09), reoperations (p = 0.70), implant loss (p = 0.27), or skin necrosis (p = 0.21). Only two of the studies included evaluated patient-reported outcomes between the use and non-use of ADM in implant-based breast reconstruction using BREAST-Q questionnaire, as well as self-reported pain. There was no reported significant difference in BREAST-Q or pain scores. This meta-analysis shows comparable short- and long-term outcomes between ADM and non-ADM breast reconstruction, suggesting that the use of ADM may not be necessary in all cases given their additional cost. However, there is a paucity of data for patient-reported outcomes, and further research is required to determine whether ADM use affects patient-reported outcomes.

Prepectoral tissue expander (TE) placement for two-stage postmastectomy reconstruction is usually performed in conjunction with insertion of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). However, the effects of ADM use on TE loss or other early complications remain unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare early postoperative complications in patients who underwent prepectoral breast implant reconstruction with or without ADM use. The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients at their institution who underwent prepectoral breast reconstruction from January of 2018 to June of 2021. The primary outcome was TE loss within 90 days of surgery; secondary outcomes included other complications such as infection, TE exposure, mastectomy skin flap necrosis requiring revision, and seroma. Data on 714 patients with 1225 TEs (1060 with ADM and 165 without) were analyzed. Baseline demographics did not differ by ADM use, although mastectomy breast tissue weight was higher in patients without ADM (750.3 g versus 540.8 g; P < 0.001). Rates of TE loss were similar in reconstructions with (3.8%) ADM and without (6.7%; P = 0.09). We also did not find differences in the rates of secondary outcomes between cohorts. ADM use had no statistically significant effect on early complication rates among patients undergoing breast reconstruction with prepectoral TEs. Still, this study was underpowered, and data trended toward statistical significance; thus, larger studies are required in the future. Additional research and randomized studies should focus on larger cohorts and examine long-term complications such as capsular contracture and implant malposition. Therapeutic, III.

PURPOSE: Tissue-expander breast reconstruction (TEBR) is the most common method of reconstruction following mastectomy. The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADMs) during this procedure allows implants to be better supported and placed in the prepectoral plane. However, ADMs have been associated with increased complication. One of the factors to consider during the process of reconstruction is ADM selection—surgeons have a variety of options to choose from, all with different specifications. Although work has been done in comparing ADM brands, there is a paucity of data regarding the importance of ADM thickness. In this study, we examine the association of ADM thickness with complications in TEBR. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients undergoing immediate TEBR with ADM from 2010 to 2019. Patients were divided based on thickness of ADM: 0.53 mm–1.2 mm (Group 1) versus greater than 1.2 mm (Group 2). Patients undergoing delayed or autologous reconstruction, or TEBR without ADM, were excluded. Only complications occurring between Stage 1 and Stage 2 of reconstruction were examined. RESULTS: In total, 228 reconstructions (137 patients) were included in the study: Group 1 included 134 reconstructions (80 patients), and Group 2 included 94 reconstructions (57 patients). Group 2 had a significantly higher rate of diabetes mellitus II than Group 1 (0% versus 7.1%, P = 0.016). Logistic regression did not reveal diabetes mellitus II to increase the likelihood of any of the complications studied. There was otherwise no significant difference in age, body mass index, tobacco use, hypertension, and radiation exposure before or after reconstruction, or in chemotherapy before or after reconstruction, between the two groups. Comparison of complications between individually reconstructed breasts in Group 1 versus Group 2 revealed significantly increased rates of skin necrosis (3.0% versus 10.6%, P = 0.018) among Group 2 breasts. Rates of infection were also increased among Group 2 (10.4% versus 18.1%, P = 0.098), which approached significance. There was no difference in reconstructive failure, conversion to autologous reconstruction, seroma, wound dehiscence, hematoma, or fat necrosis between the two groups. Logistic regression further revealed greater ADM thickness to be a significant predictor of skin necrosis (OR 3.869, 95% CI 1.175–12.738). CONCLUSIONS: To date, this study represents the largest analysis of the effect of ADM thickness on complications after TEBR and the first to show a significant difference in complications with bivariate analysis. Thicker ADMs were significantly correlated with increased rates of skin necrosis, though there may not likely be a direct causality in this relationship. The increased infection rate, though not significant, may be caused by the potential for the ADM to act as a nidus for infection as well as prolonged time of thicker ADM incorporation and neovascularization. Our results, similar to previous studies conducted on smaller patient samples,1 show that ADM thickness does indeed play a role in complication rates, and selection of ADM should be conducted carefully. REFERENCE: 1. Rose JF, Zafar SN, Ellsworth Iv WA. Does Acellular dermal matrix thickness affect complication rate in tissue expander based breast reconstruction?. Plast Surg Int. 2016;2016:2867097. doi:10.1155/2016/2867097

Direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction offers immediate aesthetic and psychological benefits, but the role of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) remains debated. Using a multi-institutional database, this study evaluates and compares outcomes between ADM-assisted and non-ADM DTI procedures. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2008 to 2022 was queried to identify female patients who underwent DTI breast reconstruction for oncological purposes. Patients were divided into 2 groups: DTI breast reconstruction with ADM and without. Thirty-day postoperative complications were compared using multivariate analysis and propensity score matching. Among 10,177 patients, 45% (n = 4605) underwent ADM-assisted DTI, while 55% (n = 5572) had non-ADM DTI. While both groups showed comparable mean ages (ADM: 52 ± 12 years vs non-ADM: 51 ± 11 years; P = 0.190), ADM patients were significantly less likely to present with comorbidities such as obesity (ADM: 21.5% vs non-ADM: 26%; P < 0.001), hypertension (20.5% vs 2.6%; P = 0.01), diabetes (4.8% vs 5.1%; P = 0.002), and smoking history (6.4% vs 10.1%; P < 0.001). Still, surgical complication rates were comparable (ADM: 4.7%, non-ADM: 5.5%; P = 0.08), including superficial infections (2.0% vs 2.4%; P = 0.19), deep infections (0.6% vs 0.9%; P = 0.17), wound dehiscence (0.8% vs 1.0%; P = 0.24), and bleeding (0.6% vs 0.7%; P = 0.54). Medical complications were generally rare and also showed no significant differences (ADM: 1.4%, non-ADM: 1.7%; P = 0.27). Confounder-adjusted multivariable analysis and propensity score matching confirmed no increased risk of surgical (odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.16, P = 0.52) or medical complications (odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.59-1.26, P = 0.46). The use of ADM in DTI breast reconstruction is not associated with a higher risk of short-term complications, supporting its continued use in clinical practice. This information is crucial for surgeons and patients in making informed decisions regarding the incorporation of ADM in DTI breast reconstruction.

The use of acellular dermal matrix in implant-based breast reconstruction has been described for improving inferolateral prosthesis coverage and support and inframammary fold reconstruction. Recommended guidelines for infection prophylaxis are the same as for any clean procedure-antibiotic administration only before surgery. Previous studies have demonstrated increased postoperative rates of infection and seroma associated with the use of acellular dermal matrix. The authors evaluated the impact of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on infection rates in postmastectomy expander-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix. : A retrospective study reviewed data of 96 patients who underwent either immediate or delayed expander-based breast reconstruction using AlloDerm allogenic acellular dermal matrix. Infection rates were analyzed after patients received postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis for at least 48 hours compared with those who received only perioperative antibiotics. Infection rates for breast reconstructions with a postoperative antibiotic course were 7.9 and 3.2 percent. Patients with only perioperative antibiotics had an infection rate of 31.6 percent. Infections were defined by the endpoint of implant removal. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and intraoperative variables were recorded. Uncontrolled variables were time course between mastectomy and reconstruction, nodal dissection, operative history, and whether reconstruction was unilateral or bilateral. This study demonstrates significant differences in the rate of infection between the groups of patients undergoing the first stage of two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction who received postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and the group that received only perioperative antibiotics. This study suggests that the optimal duration of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is at least 48 hours.

Breast cancer affects 1 in 8 women. As the treatment of breast cancer evolves, breast reconstruction does as well. Implant-based reconstructions are increasing, leading to increased use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) for better implant positioning. Acellular dermal matrices are derived from cadaveric skin and are processed to be immunologically inert. However, ADM can be costly and can have complications such as seroma and infection. This has led to the development of dermal autografts. These were first used in postmastectomy breast reconstruction in women with redundant breast skin that was deepithelialized and used for lower pole coverage of tissue expanders and implants. This evolved into harvesting dermal autografts from the abdomen. Later studies evaluated the use of meshed dermal autografts. Histological analysis of ADM versus dermal autografts shows that there are increased vessels within dermal autografts compared with ADM. This potentially contributes to the decreased complication rate seen with autografts. In addition, one study showed equivalent results in aesthetic outcomes and capsular contracture between ADM and dermal autograft. Analysis of cost has shown that ADM is significantly more costly than harvesting a dermal autograft. Physician reimbursement is also higher for dermal autografts. This review article seeks to summarize key studies that highlight the feasibility of using dermal autografts in breast reconstruction.

Multiple outcome studies have been published on the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast reconstruction with disparate results. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine an aggregate estimate of risks associated with ADM-assisted breast reconstruction. The MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were queried, and relevant articles published up to September 2010 were analyzed based on specific inclusion criteria. Seven complications were studied including seroma, cellulitis, infection, hematoma, skin flap necrosis, capsular contracture, and reconstructive failure. A pooled random effects estimate for each complication and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were derived. For comparisons of ADM and non-ADM, the pooled random effects odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI were derived. Heterogeneity was measured using the I2 statistic. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled complication rates were seroma (6.9%; 95% CI, 5.3%-8.8%), cellulitis (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.2%-3.1%), infection (5.7%; 95% CI, 4.3%-7.3%), skin flap necrosis (10.9%; 95% CI, 8.7%-13.5%), hematoma (1.3%; 95% CI, 0.6%-2.4%), capsular contracture (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.1%-1.7%), and reconstructive failure (5.1%; 95% CI, 3.8%-6.7%). Five studies reported findings for both the ADM and non-ADM patients and were used in the meta-analysis to calculate pooled OR. ADM-assisted breast reconstructions had a higher likelihood of seroma (pooled OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.4-6.2), infection (pooled OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1-6.4), and reconstructive failure (pooled OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.3-6.8) than breast reconstructions without the use of ADM. The relation of ADM use to hematoma (pooled OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 0.8-5.2), cellulitis (pooled OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 0.9-4.3), and skin flap necrosis (pooled OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.6-5.4) was inconclusive. In the studies evaluated, ADM-assisted breast reconstructions exhibited a higher likelihood of seroma, infection, and reconstructive failure than prosthetic-based breast reconstructions using traditional musculofascial flaps. ADM is associated with a lower rate of capsular contracture. A careful risk/benefit analysis should be performed when choosing to use ADM in implant-based breast reconstruction.

Background:Latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap (LDMF) with tissue expander provides excellent results in breast reconstruction. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been used in expander-based reconstruction (EBR) with good results. This study assesses how ADM compares to LDMF in EBR.Methods:The cohorts comprised 124 patients (218 breasts) who had EBR using ADM between 2006 and 2012, and 242 patients (266 breasts) who had EBR using LDMF between 1994 and 2012. Postoperative complications, reoperations, Breast-Q scores, and objectively assessed aesthetic outcomes were compared.Results:Median age was 55 years for both ADM (range 23–84) and LDMF (range 26–88) groups. No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in the rates of major postoperative complications (P > 0.3). Forty-nine of the 218 (22.5%) in the ADM group and 67 of 266 (25.2%) in the LDMF group had a total of 63 and 84 reoperations, respectively (P = 0.52), with no significant differences in the reoperations rate (P > 0.3). No significant differences were observed in the Breast-Q scores. Some categorical differences were noted in the aesthetic outcomes; however, the difference between the overall outcomes was not significant (P = 0.54).Conclusion:Our study revealed no statistically significant differences in the complications or reoperation rates, patient satisfaction, or overall aesthetic outcomes when comparing the use of ADM to LDMF in EBR. In conclusion, this study supports the hypothesis that ADM performs as well as LDMF in EBR.

Acellular dermal matrix was introduced in breast reconstruction in 2001 and is gradually becoming a standard component for immediate breast reconstruction and nipple-sparing mastectomy. The reconstructive technique allows for improved aesthetic outcomes. However, there seems to be uncertainty regarding complication rates. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate complication rates related to this method. This systematic review was conducted according to the recommendations outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for reviews and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Relevant databases were searched for in the literature concerning the use of acellular dermal matrix in implant-based nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. All studies underwent detailed quality assessment. Summarized outcome rates were computed using meta-analysis. Nine of 1,039 studies were eligible for inclusion yielding 778 procedures. The quality was acceptable for all included studies. The meta-analysis found the rate of skin necrosis to be 11%, nipple necrosis 5%, infection in 12%, hematoma in 1%, treated seroma in 5%, explantation 4%, and unplanned return to the operating room in 9%. The use of acellular dermal matrix in nipple-sparing mastectomy and implant-based breast reconstruction can be done with acceptable complication rates in selected patients. We recommend future studies to include specific definitions when reporting complication rates. Furthermore, future studies should elaborate on demographic characteristics of the included study samples and include predictor analysis to enhance knowledge of high risk patients.

Acellular bovine pericardium dermal matrix in immediate breast reconstruction after Skin Sparing Mastectomy

Many patients who require breast reconstruction prefer a flap-based approach for various reasons, including the permanence and aesthetic benefit of a breast that looks and feels natural. For patients who desire autologous breast reconstruction following mastectomy but lack adequate donor site volume, the authors utilize the novel hybrid flap, prepectoral acellular dermal matrix (HyPAD) approach. In this technique, the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is augmented with a stacked acellular dermal matrix (ADM). The purpose of this study is to quantify the soft tissue augmentation and core projection achieved with this technique during autologous flap-based breast reconstruction. Consecutive patients who underwent the HyPAD technique during the study period (August 2021 to December 2022) were identified. All patients lacked adequate donor site volume and wished to avoid the placement of implants during their reconstruction. Demographic information and outcomes were assessed. Intraoperatively, the weights (g) of the mastectomy specimen, the flap donor site, and the stacked ADM were recorded. During the study period, 21 patients (n = 21) were identified. The mean age of patients at the time of surgery was 48.9 ± 7.85 years. The mean body mass index was 24.1 kg/m2 ± 3.3 kg/m2. The mean mastectomy specimen weight was 436.35 g, and the mean flap weight was 370.73 g, posing an average discrepancy of 15.04% or 65.62 g. The average weight of the ADM used to augment the flap was 81.76 g. This weight accounted for an average of 18.07% of the total reconstructed breast weight. The use of ADM during autologous breast reconstruction provides patients with an alternative to implants that allows them to obtain their desired breast volume. Given the aesthetic impact that ADM has on the total amount of flap weight and projection, it is recommended that the HyPAD technique be considered for patients who desire a breast that cannot be restored with their own flap weight and wish to avoid implants.

The last decade has ushered in a rapidly expanding global discussion regarding acellular dermal matrix (ADM) applications, economic analyses, technical considerations, benefits, and risks, with recent emphasis on ADM use in breast surgery. This study aims to evaluate global trends in ADM research using bibliometric analysis. The top nine Plastic Surgery journals were determined by impact factor (IF). Each issue of the nine journals between 1999 and 2013 was accessed to compile a database of articles discussing ADM. Publications were further classified by IF, authors’ geographic location, study design, and level of evidence (LOE, I-V). Productivity index and productivity share were calculated for each region. In total, 256 ADM articles were accessed. The annual global publication volume increased significantly by 4.2 (0.87) articles per year (p<0.001), with a mean productivity index of 36.3 (59.0). The mean impact factor of the nine journals increased significantly from 0.61 (0.11) to 2.47 (0.99) from 1993 to 2013 (p<0.001). Despite this increase in the global ADM literature, the majority of research was of weaker LOE (level I: 2.29% and level II: 9.17%). USA contributed the most research (87%), followed by Asia (4.76%) and Western Europe (4.71%). USA contributed the greatest volume of research. Regarding clinical application of ADM, the majority of publications focused on ADM use in breast surgery, specifically breast reconstruction (154 articles, 60.2%). The majority of research was of lower LOE; thus, efforts should be made to strengthen the body of literature, particularly with regard to cost analysis.

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the oncologic safety of direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction without the use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) or mesh following nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy in patients with primary breast cancer. Materials and Methods: The medical records of 175 patients who underwent one-stage direct-to-implant breast reconstruction following mastectomy at the Istanbul University Oncology Institute between 2014 and 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary objective was to assess the oncologic safety, including locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, and survival outcomes. The secondary objective was to evaluate reconstruction-related complications. Results: The median age of the patients was 44 years (range: 25-74), with a median follow-up period of 53 months (range: 19-101). HR+/HER2-, HR+/HER2+, and pure HER2+ subtypes were observed in 101 patients (57.7%), 26 (14.9%), 23 (13.%), respectively. Triple-negative breast cancer was present in 16 patients (9.1%). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 87 patients (49.7%), with a pathological complete response (pCR) rate of 17.2%. Skin necrosis (9.1%) and capsular contracture (8.6%) were the most common complications, with implant loss occuring in seven patients. Locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis rates were 9.7% and 13.1%, respectively. The five-year locoregional recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 95.4% and 90.3%. Additionally, 83.5% of patients reported their satisfaction as "excellent" or "good." Conclusion: One-stage direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction without the use of an acellular dermal matrix or mesh is oncologically safe, with acceptable complication rates, making it a viable alternative to two-stage breast reconstruction or conventional mastectomy.

In immediate one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is widely used around the world due to its ability to cover the outside part of the pectoralis major muscle. Unfortunately, ADM has not yet been approved in Japan. Consequently, in our institution, we have performed safe one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction without ADM by employing several unique techniques and have obtained excellent results. The data of 186 patients were reviewed. In each case, we performed three unique steps to determine which cases were suitable for one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction as follows. First, ICG fluorescence imaging was performed to confirm the blood flow of the skin after mastectomy. Next, a serratus anterior muscle/fascial and external oblique fascial flap was elevated to completely cover the implant together with the pectoralis major muscle. We used a sizer to confirm the skin tension and the form of the breast. After confirming correct size, shape and coverage, we selected cases in which implant could be safely performed. We evaluated the final cosmetic outcome based on three measurements: the inframammary fold position, and the bilateral balance of both breast size and form. The rate of immediate one-stage implant-based reconstruction was 85.7%. An implant was removed in one case because of complications, and infection developed in five cases. Among all patients, the overall cosmetic evaluation of the final outcome was evaluated as good, fair and poor in 84.3%, 13.5% and 2.2% of cases, respectively. Immediate one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction without ADM can be a useful and safe procedure, based on our unique techniques in breast cancer patients who hope for immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction in Japan.

The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been popularized in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). However, it is still controversial if ADM-associated complication rates differ with varying types of ADM products. The aim of this study was to compare postoperative complications between CGCRYODERM and DermACELL. A retrospective chart review was performed on 32 patients (64 breasts) who underwent bilateral prosthetic breast reconstruction between June 2015 and December 2019. All patients received two different ADMs in each breast during the surgery. Demographic variables, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the cryopreserved and pre-hydrated ADM. The overall major and minor postoperative complications developed in 7 and 1 out of 32 patients, respectively. Seroma and infection were the most common complications. There were no cases that infection and/or seroma involved both breasts in one individual. No significant differences were observed in terms of seroma, infection, hematoma, mastectomy flap necrosis, or drainage period between the CGCRYODERM and DermACELL groups (P=0.5637, 0.1797, 1.0000, 0.3173, and 0.2925, respectively). There was no case of reconstruction failure leading to explantation. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications between the two breasts reconstructed with CGCRYODERM and DermACELL in the same patient who underwent bilateral IBR. This is the first study to compare cryopreserved and pre-hydrated ADMs. We suggest that CGCRYODERM is a suitable option with a comparable safety profile for IBR.