Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Breast Reconstruction with Biological and Non-biological Meshes and Matrices

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Cancer

Abstract

Since 2005, biological and non-biological meshes have been increasingly used in prosthetic breast reconstruction. Principally, by placing the mesh at the lower pole of the reconstructive pocket, the surgeon is able to increase the expander volume fill initially or immediately place an implant (direct-to-implant reconstruction). The mesh or matrix also provides additional soft tissue cover to the inferolateral pole of the breast. The majority of meshes and matrices used currently are biological (e.g. acellular dermal matrices). Overall complication rates for mesh-assisted prosthetic reconstructions are reported to be increased; however, due to the lack of level I evidence in this field and reporting bias, the magnitude of this effect remains unclear. Prospective randomised controlled trials are needed to investigate this in greater detail. Good aesthetic results have been achieved using this technique which is recommended for women with a low BMI opting for implant reconstruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Breuing KH, Warren SM (2005) Immediate bilateral breast reconstruction with implants and inferolateral Alloderm slings. Ann Plast Surg 55:232–239

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Salzberg CA (2006) Nonexpansive immediate breast reconstruction using human acellular tissue matrix graft (Alloderm). Ann Plast Surg 57:1–5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Colwell AS (2015) Current strategies with 1-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction. Gland Surg. 4:111–115

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Weichman KE, Wilson SC, Al W et al (2012) The use of acellular dermal matrix in immediate two-stage tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 129:1049–1058

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Colwell AS, Tessler O, Lin AM, Liao E, Winograd J, Cetrulo CL, Tang R, Smith BL, Austen WG Jr (2014) Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictors of complications, reconstruction outcomes, and 5-year trends. Plast Reconstr Surg 133(3):496–506

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Govshievich A, Somogyi RB, Brown MH (2015) Conservative mastectomies and immediate reconstruction with the use of ADMs. Gland Surg 4(6):453–462

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Nahabedian MY (2012) Acellular dermal matrices in primary breast reconstruction: principles, concepts, and indications. Plast Reconstr Surg 130:44S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim JY, Connor CM (2012) Focus on technique: two-stage implant based breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 130:104S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Martin JB, Moore R, Paydar KZ et al (2014) Use of fenestrations in acellular dermal allograft in two-stage tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 134(5):901–904

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Masden RJ Jr, Chim J, Ang B et al (2015) Variance in the origin of the pectoralis major muscle: implications for implant based reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 74:111–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Vu MM, Kim JY (2015) Current opinions on indications and algorithms for acellular dermal matrix use in primary prosthetic breast reconstruction. Gland Surg. 4(3):195–203

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee KT, Mun GH (2015) Updated evidence of acellular dermal matrix use for implant-based breast reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 23(2):600–610

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rodriguez-Feliz J, Codner MA (2015) Embrace the change: incorporating single-stage implant breast reconstruction into your practice. Plast Reconstr Surg 136(2):221–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ganske I, Verma K, Rosen H et al (2013) Minimising complications with the use of acellular dermal matrix for immediate implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 71:464–470

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Forsberg CG, Kelly DA, Wood BC et al (2014) Aesthetic outcomes of acellular dermal matrix in tissue expander/implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 72(6):S116–S120

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Topol BM, Dalton EF, Ponn T et al (2008) Immediate single-stage breast reconstruction using implants and human acellular dermal tissue matrix with adjustment of the lower pole of the breast to reduce unwanted lift. Ann Plast Surg 61:494–499

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Vardanian AJ, Clayton JL, Roostaeian J et al (2011) Comparison of implant-based immediate breast reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(5):403e–410e

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ibrahim AM, Koolen PG, Ganor O et al (2015) Does acellular dermal matrix really improve aesthetic outcome in tissue expander/implant-based breast reconstruction? Aesthet Plast Surg 39(3):359–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Carruthers CA, Dearth CL, Reing JE (2015) Histologic characterization of acellular dermal matrices in a porcine model of tissue expander breast reconstruction. Tissue Eng Part A 21(1–2):35–44

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Garcia O Jr, Scott JR (2013) Analysis of acellular dermal matrix integration and revascularization following tissue expander breast reconstruction in a clinically relevant large-animal model. Plast Reconstr Surg 131(5):741e–751e

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ho G, Nguyen TJ, Shahabi A et al (2012) A systematic review and meta-analysis of complications associated with acellular dermal matrix-assisted breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 68(4):346–356

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Salzberg CA, Ashikari AY, Koch RM et al (2011) An 8-year experience of direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction using human acellular dermal matrix (AlloDerm). Plast Reconstr Surg 1270(2):514–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kocak E, Nagel T, Hulsen J et al (2014) Biologic matrices in oncologic breast reconstruction after mastectomy. Expert Rev Med Dev 11(1):65–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Lardi AM, Ho-Asjoe M, Mohanna PN, Farhadi J (2014) Immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: factors affecting outcome. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 67(8):1098–1105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B et al (2011) Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(6):1170–1178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ibrahim A, Olubimpe A, Ayeni M et al (2013) Acellular dermal matrices in breast surgery. Ann Plast Surg 70:732–738

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Haynes DF, Kreithen JC (2014) Vicryl mesh in expander/implant breast reconstruction: long-term follow-up in 38 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 134(5):892–899

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rodriguez-Unda N, Leiva S, Cheng HT et al (2015) Low incidence of complications using polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) mesh in breast reconstruction: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 68(11):1543–1549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Fine NA, Lehfeldt M, Gross JE et al (2015) SERI surgical scaffold, prospective clinical trial of a silk-derived biological scaffold in two-stage reconstruction: 1 year-data. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(2):339–351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ganske I, Hoyler M, Fox SE et al (2014) Delayed hypersensitivity reaction to acellular dermal matrix in breast reconstruction: the red breast syndrome? Ann Plast Surg 73(Suppl 2):S139–S143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bank J, Phillips NA et al (2013) Economic analysis and review of the literature on implant-based breast reconstruction with and without the use of the acellular dermal matrix. Aesthet Plast Surg 37(6):1194–1201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. De Blacam C, Momoh AO, Colakoglu S et al (2012) Cost analysis of implant-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix. Ann Plast Surg 69(5):516–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Krishnan NM, Chatterjee A, Rosenkranz KM et al (2014) The cost effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix in expander-implant immediate breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 67(4):468–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ibrahim AM, Koolen PG, Ashraf AA et al (2015) Acellular dermal matrix in reconstructive breast surgery: survey of current practice among plastic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 3(4):e381

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Dieterich M, Paepke S, Zwiefel K et al (2013) Implant-based breast reconstruction using a titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TiLoop bra): a multicenter study of 231 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(1):8e–19e

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Becker H, Lind JG II (2013) The use of synthetic mesh in reconstructive, revision, and cosmetic breast surgery. Aesthet Plast Surg 37(5):914–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Riggio E, Chifu C, Martelli G et al (2015) Can titanium mesh influence local recurrence management after implant-based breast reconstruction? Springerplus 4:482. doi:10.1186/s40064-015-1273-3. eCollection 2015

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Riggio E, Ottolenghi J, Grassi V et al (2013) One stage implant-based reconstruction of the breast in a single patient: comparison between mesh and modified dual plane technique. Surg Tech Dev 3(1):e1:1–e1:4. doi:10.4081/std.2013.e1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hunsicker LM, Ashikari AY, Berry C et al (2016) Short-term complications associated with acellular dermal matrix-assisted direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 78(1):35–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ibrahim AM, Shuster M, Koolen PG et al (2013) Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database in 19,100 patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction: complication rates with acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(5):1057–1066

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhao X, Wu X, Dong J et al (2015) A meta-analysis of postoperative complications of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix. Aesthet Plast Surg 39(6):892–901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sbitany H, Serletti JM (2011) Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction: a systematic and critical review of efficacy and associated morbidity. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(6):1162–1169

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Nguyen T, Carey JN, Wong AK (2011) Use of human acellular dermal matrix in implant- based breast reconstruction: evaluating the evidence. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 64(12):1553–1561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Potter S, Browning D, Savović J et al (2015) Systematic review and critical appraisal of the impact of acellular dermal matrix use on the outcomes of implant-based breast reconstruction. Br J Surg 102(9):1010–1025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. McCarthy C, Lee C, Halvorson EG et al (2012) The use of acellular dermal matrices in two-stage expander/implant reconstruction: a multicenter, blinded randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(Suppl 2):57s–66s

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Selber JC, Wren JH, Garvey PB et al (2015) Critical evaluation of risk factors and early complications in 564 consecutive two-stage implant-based breast reconstructions using acellular dermal matrix at a single center. Plast Reconstr Surg 136(1):10–20

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Weichman KE, Levine SM, Wilson SC (2013) Antibiotic selection for the treatment of infectious complications of implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 71(2):140–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Phillips BT, Bishawi M, Dagum AB et al (2014) A systematic review of infection rates and associated antibiotic duration in acellular dermal matrix breast reconstruction. Eplasty 11(14):e42. eCollection 2014

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lewis P, Jewell J, Mattison G (2015) Reducing postoperative infections and red breast syndrome in patients with acellular dermal matrix-based breast reconstruction: the relative roles of product sterility and lower body mass index. Ann Plast Surg 74(Suppl 1):S30–S32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Hadad I, Liu AS, Guo L (2015) A new approach to minimize acellular dermal matrix use in prosthesis-based breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 3(7):e472

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Porter KA, O’Connor S, Rimm E et al (1998) Electrocautery as a factor in seroma formation following mastectomy. Am J Surg 176(1):8–11

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Citron I, Dower R, Ho-Asjoe M (2016) Protocol for the prevention and management of complications related to ADM implant-based breast reconstructions. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW 21(5):Doc06

    Google Scholar 

  53. Ganske I, Verma K, Rosen H et al (2013) Minimizing complications with the use of acellular dermal matrix for immediate implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 71(5):464–470

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Hoppe I, Yueh JH, Wei C et al (2011) Complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction utilising acellular dermal matrix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eplasty 11:417–428

    Google Scholar 

  55. Kim J, Davila A, Persing S et al (2012) A meta-analysis of human acellular dermis and submuscular tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 35:100–106

    Google Scholar 

  56. Israeli R (2012) Complications of acellular dermal matrices in breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(suppl 2):159S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Winocour S, Martinez-Jorge J, Habermann E et al (2015) Early surgical site infection following tissue expander breast reconstruction with or without acellular dermal matrix: national benchmarking using national surgical quality improvement program. Arch Plast Surg 42(2):194–200

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Gdalevitch P, Ho A, Genoway K et al (2014) Direct-to-implant single-stage immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: predictors of failure. Plast Reconstr Surg 133(6):738e–747e

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Komorowska-Timek E, Gurtner GC (2010) Intraoperative perfusion mapping with laser-assisted indocyanine green imaging can predict and prevent complications in immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 125(4):1065–1073

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. McCarthy CM, Mehrara BJ, Riedel E et al (2008) Predicting complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction: an outcomes analysis based on preoperative clinical risk. Plast Reconstr Surg 121(6):1886–1892

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Peled AW, Foster RD, Garwood ER et al (2012) The effects of acellular dermal matrix in expander-implant breast reconstruction after total skin-sparing mastectomy: results of a prospective practice improvement study. Plast Reconstr Surg 129(6):901e–908e

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7EH, England

    Rachel Rolph & Jian Farhadi

Authors
  1. Rachel Rolph
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jian Farhadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jian Farhadi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. European Institutee of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Umberto Veronesi

  2. European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Aron Goldhirsch

  3. European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Paolo Veronesi

  4. San Raffaele University and Research Hospital, Milano, Italy

    Oreste Davide Gentilini

  5. European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Maria Cristina Leonardi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rolph, R., Farhadi, J. (2017). Breast Reconstruction with Biological and Non-biological Meshes and Matrices. In: Veronesi, U., Goldhirsch, A., Veronesi, P., Gentilini, O., Leonardi, M. (eds) Breast Cancer. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48848-6_40

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48848-6_40

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48846-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48848-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation