Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Implant Based Breast Reconstruction Using a Titanium-Coated Polypropylene Mesh (TiLOOP® Bra): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

  • Review
  • Body Contouring
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) can be performed using a variety of biological and synthetic meshes. However, there has yet to be a consensus on the optimal mesh. This study investigates the safety and patient satisfaction of using TiLOOP® Bra in IBBR and compares its postoperative complication risk with that of porcine acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and SERAGYN® BR.

Methods

The literature review was performed via PRISMA criteria, 23 studies met the inclusion criteria for the TiLOOP® Bra review, and 5 studies met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Patient characteristics and per-breast complications were collected. Data were analyzed using Cochrane RevMan and IBM SPSS.

Results

In 3175 breasts of 2685 patients that underwent IBBR using TiLOOP® Bra, rippling was observed as the most common complication, followed by seroma and capsular contracture. No significant difference in the overall complication rate between pre- and sub-pectoral IBBR using TiLOOP® Bra. However, the meta-analysis showed that the TiLOOP® Bra group had significantly lower odds of implant loss, seroma, wound dehiscence, and the need for reoperation or hospitalization than the ADM group. Additionally, the TiLOOP® Bra group had a significantly lower seroma rate compared to the SERAGYN® BR group, while the other outcome indicators were similar between the two groups.

Conclusion

TiLOOP® Bra has become increasingly popular in IBBR in recent years. This review and meta-analysis support the favorable safety profile of TiLOOP® Bra reported in the current literature. The meta-analysis revealed that TiLOOP® Bra has better safety than ADM and a comparable risk of complications compared to SERAGYN® BR. However, as most studies had low levels of evidence, further investigations are necessary.

Level of Evidence III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F (2021) Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71(3):209–249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ermoshchenkova MV, Zikiryahodjaev AD, Reshetov IV, Svyatoslavov DS, Sinelnikov MY (2021) Psychological and aesthetic outcomes in breast cancer patients. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 9(7):e3679. https://doi.org/10.1097/gox.0000000000003679

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Bi S, Liu R, Wu B, Shen Y, Jia K, Sun K, Gu J (2020) Breast implants for mammaplasty: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of multiple complications. Aesthetic Plast Surg 44(6):1988–1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-01866-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Abbate O, Rosado N, Sobti N, Vieira BL, Liao EC (2020) Meta-analysis of prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: guide to patient selection and current outcomes. Breast Cancer Res Treat 182(3):543–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05722-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Huang NS, Quan CL, Ma LX, Si J, Chen JJ, Yang BL, Huang XY, Liu GY, Shen ZZ, Shao ZM, Wu J (2016) Current status of breast reconstruction in China: an experience of 951 breast reconstructions from a single institute. Gland Surg 5(3):278–286. https://doi.org/10.21037/gs.2016.03.01

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Zaborowski AM, Heeney A, Walsh S, Barry M, Kell MR (2023) Immediate breast reconstruction. Br J Surg. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znad064

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Vidya R, Iqbal FM (2017) A guide to prepectoral breast reconstruction: a new dimension to implant-based breast reconstruction. Clin Breast Cancer 17(4):266–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2016.11.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Liu J, Hou J, Li Z, Wang B, Sun J (2020) Efficacy of acellular dermal matrix in capsular contracture of implant-based breast reconstruction: a single-arm meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 44(3):735–742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01603-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wilson RL, Kirwan CC, Johnson RK, O’Donoghue JM, Linforth RA, Harvey JR (2023) Breast Reconstruction Outcomes With and without StratticE (BROWSE)- Long-term outcomes of a multi-centre study comparing Strattice TM immediate implant breast reconstruction with submuscular implant reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000010157

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen LE, Bogue JT, Jin J, Disa JJ (2021) Explantation in tissue expander and direct-to-implant reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: how to avoid early reconstructive failures. Plast Reconstr Surg 147(4):579e–586e. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000007702

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Guo R, Li L, Su Y, Xiu B, Zhang Q, Wang J, Chi W, Yang B, Zhang Y, Cao A, Shao Z, Wu J (2020) Current practice and barriers of mesh-assisted implant-based breast reconstruction in China: a nationwide cross-sectional survey of 110 hospitals. Eur J Surg Oncol 46(1):65–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2019.09.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dieterich M, Paepke S, Zwiefel K, Dieterich H, Blohmer J, Faridi A, Klein E, Gerber B, Nestle-Kraemling C (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. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318290f8a0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nguyen-Sträuli BD, Vorburger D, Frauchiger-Heuer H, Bringolf L, Maggi N, Talimi-Schnabel J, Dedes KJ (2022) Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with TiLOOP® Bra Pocket - a single-centre retrospective study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 75(1):104–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2021.08.027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gschwantler-Kaulich D, Schrenk P, Bjelic-Radisic V, Unterrieder K, Leser C, Fink-Retter A, Salama M, Singer C (2016) Mesh versus acellular dermal matrix in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction - A prospective randomized trial. Eur J Surg Oncol 42(5):665–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.02.007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ohlinger R, Nawroth F, Kohlmann T, Alwafai Z, Schueler K, Zygmunt M, Paepke S (2021) Retrospective study of radiotherapy impact on the outcome of material-assisted implant-based subpectoral breast reconstruction. Anticancer Res 41(4):2017–2024. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.14969

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gentile P, Bernini M, Orzalesi L, Sordi S, Meattini I, Lessi F, Kothari A, Calabrese C (2021) Titanium-coated polypropylene mesh as innovative bioactive material in conservatives mastectomies and pre-pectoral breast reconstruction. Bioact Mater 6(12):4640–4653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.05.002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Casella D, Bernini M, Bencini L, Roselli J, Lacaria MT, Martellucci J, Banfi R, Calabrese C, Orzalesi L (2014) TiLoop Bra mesh used for immediate breast reconstruction: comparison of retropectoral and subcutaneous implant placement in a prospective single-institution series. Eur J Plast Surg 37(11):599–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-014-1001-1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Woo A, Harless C, Jacobson SR (2017) Revisiting an old place: single-surgeon experience on post-mastectomy subcutaneous implant-based breast reconstruction. Breast J 23(5):545–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12790

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Casella D, Di Taranto G, Marcasciano M, Sordi S, Kothari A, Kovacs T, Lo Torto F, Cigna E, Calabrese C, Ribuffo D (2019) Evaluation of prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with TiLoop bra mesh for breast reconstruction: a prospective study on long-term and patient-reported BREAST-Q outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 143(1):1e–9e. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000005078

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang Y, Zhang B, Zhang T, Guan S (2018) Advances in the use of artificial materials in implant-based breast reconstruction for breast cancer. Chin J Pract Surger. https://doi.org/10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2018.11.22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ostapenko E, Nixdorf L, Devyatko Y, Exner R, Wimmer K, Fitzal F (2023) Prepectoral versus subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 30(1):126–136. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-12567-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Blok YL, Plat VD, van der Hage JA, Krekel NMA, Mureau MAM (2022) Nation-wide validation of a multicenter risk model for implant loss following implant-based breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 75(12):4347–4353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2022.08.065

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mahoney B, Walklet E, Bradley E, Thrush S, Skillman J, Whisker L, Barnes N, Holcombe C, Potter S (2020) Experiences of implant loss after immediate implant-based breast reconstruction: qualitative study. BJS Open 4(3):380–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50275

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Becherer BE, Heeg E, Young-Afat DA, Vrancken Peeters M-JTFD, Rakhorst HA, Mureau MAM (2022) Revision incidence after immediate direct-to-implant versus two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction: results from a nationwide breast implant registry. Plast Reconstruct Surg 151:693–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hirsch EM, Seth AK, Kim JYS, Dumanian GA, Mustoe TA, Galiano RD, Fine NA (2014) Analysis of risk factors for complications in expander/implant breast reconstruction by stage of reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 134(5):692e–699e. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000000607

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fischer JP, Wes AM, Tuggle CT 3rd, Serletti JM, Wu LC (2013) Risk analysis of early implant loss after immediate breast reconstruction: a review of 14,585 patients. J Am Coll Surg 217(6):983–990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.07.389

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schueler K, Paepke S, Kohlmann T, Alwafai Z, Nawroth F, Zygmunt M, Ohlinger R (2021) Postoperative complications in breast reconstruction with porcine acellular dermis and polypropylene meshes in subpectoral implant placement. In Vivo 35(5):2739–2746. https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12558

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee KT, Mun GH (2016) Updated evidence of acellular dermal matrix use for implant-based breast reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 23(2):600–610. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4873-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rao D, Xie J, Xia Y, Cao D (2022) Comparison of flap fixation to its bed and conventional wound closure with drainage in preventing seroma formation following mastectomy for breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 46(3):1180–1188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-02814-w

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Jordan SW, Khavanin N, Kim JYS (2016) Seroma in prosthetic breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(4):1104–1116. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000481102.24444.72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Eichler C, Schulz C, Thangarajah F, Malter W, Warm M, Brunnert K (2019) A retrospective head-to-head comparison between TiLoop Bra/TiMesh (R) and Seragyn (R) in 320 cases of reconstructive breast surgery. Anticancer Res 39(5):2599–2605. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mazari FAK, Wattoo GM, Kazzazi NH, Kolar KM, Olubowale OO, Rogers CE, Azmy IA (2018) The comparison of strattice and surgimend in acellular dermal matrix-assisted, implant-based immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 141(2):283–293. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ball JF, Sheena Y, Tarek Saleh DM, Forouhi P, Benyon SL, Irwin MS, Malata CM (2017) A direct comparison of porcine (Strattice™) and bovine (Surgimend™) acellular dermal matrices in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 70(8):1076–1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2017.05.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

There is no commercial interest in the subject of study and no source of any financial or material support.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. General Surgery Department, Yongchuan Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No. 439, Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan District, Chongqing, 402160, China

    Tingjian Zhang & Tian Tian

  2. Department of Surgery, Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Yongchuan, Chongqing, 402160, China

    Jing Ye

Authors
  1. Tingjian Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jing Ye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tian Tian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tian Tian.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

For this type of study, informed consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOC 170 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, T., Ye, J. & Tian, T. Implant Based Breast Reconstruction Using a Titanium-Coated Polypropylene Mesh (TiLOOP® Bra): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Aesth Plast Surg 48, 925–935 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03500-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03500-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation