Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 600–610 | Cite as

Updated Evidence of Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis

  • Kyeong-Tae Lee
  • Goo-Hyun Mun
Reconstructive Oncology

Abstract

Background

Although the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has increased exponentially, debates regarding its safety are still ongoing. There have been several meta-analyses; however, potential learning curve effects of using ADM might affect their outcomes. The present meta-analysis reappraised the potential benefits and risks of ADM on the outcome of implant-based breast reconstruction using recent publications.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched to identify relevant studies comparing the outcome of ADM use with traditional submuscular technique, which were published from 2011 to 2014. The relative risks of postoperative complications and mean difference of expander dynamics between the two groups were computed.

Results

A total of 23 studies representing 6199 cases were analyzed. There was one randomized controlled study and three prospective cohort studies. The use of ADM significantly elevated the risks of infection, seroma, and mastectomy flap necrosis, but did not affect the risks of implant loss, unplanned reoperation, and total complications. The risks of capsular contracture and implant malposition were significantly reduced by the application of ADM. The ADM allows for significantly greater intraoperative expansion and reduced frequency of injection to complete expansion.

Conclusions

According to this meta-analysis, the increasing risks for serious complication and overall morbidity related to ADM use might not be remarkable, while its benefits for preventing late complications and improving expander dynamics might be appreciable. Although future well-controlled studies would be required, the implant-based breast reconstruction using ADM may be reliable and advantageous.

Keywords

Tissue Expander Capsular Contracture Acellular Dermal Matrix Total Complication Expander Dynamic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

Financial Disclosure

None of the authors has a financial interest in any of the products, devices, or drugs mentioned in this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Breuing KH, Warren SM. Immediate bilateral breast reconstruction with implants and inferolateral AlloDerm slings. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;55:232–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spear SL, Parikh PM, Reisin E, Menon NG. Acellular dermis-assisted breast reconstruction. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2008;32:418–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buck DW, 2nd, Heyer K, DiBardino D, Bethke K, Kim JY. Acellular dermis-assisted breast reconstruction with the use of crescentric tissue expansion: a functional cosmetic analysis of 40 consecutive patients. Aesthet Surg J. 2010;30:194–200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rawlani V, Buck DW, Johnson SA, Heyer KS, Kim JYS. Tissue expander breast reconstruction using prehydrated human acellular dermis. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;66:593–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Namnoum JD. Expander/implant reconstruction with AlloDerm: recent experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:387–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Spear SL, Sher SR, Al-Attar A, Pittman T. Applications of acellular dermal matrix in revision breast reconstruction surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133:1–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Breuing KH, Colwell AS. Inferolateral AlloDerm hammock for implant coverage in breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2007;59:250–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Topol BM, Dalton EF, Ponn T, Campbell CJ. 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. 2008;61:494–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Preminger BA, McCarthy CM, Hu QY, Mehrara BJ, Disa JJ. The influence of AlloDerm on expander dynamics and complications in the setting of immediate tissue expander/implant reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2008;60:510–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Antony AK, McCarthy CM, Cordeiro PG, et al. Acellular human dermis implantation in 153 immediate two-stage tissue expander breast reconstructions: determining the incidence and significant predictors of complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:1606–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chun YS, Verma K, Rosen H, Lipsitz S, Morris D, Kenney P, Eriksson E. Implant-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix and the risk of postoperative complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:429–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nahabedian MY. AlloDerm performance in the setting of prosthetic breast surgery, infection, and irradiation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1743–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lanier ST, Wang ED, Chen JJ, et al. The effect of acellular dermal matrix use on complication rates in tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2010;64:674–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parks JW, Hammond SE, Walsh WA, Adams RL, Chandler RG, Luce EA. Human acellular dermis versus no acellular dermis in tissue expansion breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130:739–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seth AK, Hirsch EM, Fine NA, Kim JY. Utility of acellular dermis-assisted breast reconstruction in the setting of radiation: a comparative analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130:750–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim JYS, Davila AA, Persing S, et al. A meta-analysis of human acellular dermis and submuscular tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:28–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ho G, Nguyen TJ, Shahabi A, Hwang BH, Chan LS, Wong AK. A systematic review and meta-analysis of complications associated with acellular dermal matrix-assisted breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;68:346–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hoppe IC, Yueh JH, Wei CH, Ahuja NK, Patel PP, Datiashvili RO. Complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction utilizing acellular dermal matrix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eplasty. 2011;11:e40.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sbitany H, Serletti JM. Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction: a systematic and critical review of efficacy and associated morbidity. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1162–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu AS, Kao H-K, Reish RG, Hergrueter CA, May JW, Guo L. Postoperative complications in prosthesis-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:1755–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sbitany H, Sandeen SN, Amalfi AN, Davenport MS, Langstein HN. Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction versus complete submuscular coverage: a head-to-head comparison of outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1735–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vardanian AJ, Clayton JL, Roostaeian J, et al. Comparison of implant-based immediate breast reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:403e–10e.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brooke S, Mesa J, Uluer M, et al. Complications in tissue expander breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;69:347–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Collis GN, TerKonda SP, Waldorf JC, Perdikis G. Acellular dermal matrix slings in tissue expander breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;68:425–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Endress R, Choi MSS, Lee GK. Use of fetal bovine acellular dermal xenograft with tissue expansion for staged breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;68:338–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hill JL, Wong L, Kemper P, Buseman J, Davenport DL, Vasconez HC. Infectious complications associated with the use of acellular dermal matrix in implant-based bilateral breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;68:432–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    McCarthy CM, Lee CN, Halvorson EG, Riedel E, Pusic AL, Mehrara BJ, Disa JJ. The use of acellular dermal matrices in two-stage expander/implant reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130:57S–66S.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Peled AW, Foster RD, Garwood ER, et al. The effects of acellular dermal matrix in expander-implant breast reconstruction after total skin-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:901e–8e.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weichman KE, Wilson SC, Weinstein AL, Hazen A, Levine JP, Choi M, Karp NS. The use of acellular dermal matrix in immediate two-stage tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:1049–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bank J, Phillips NA, Park JE, Song DH. 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. 2013;37:1194–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Buseman J, Wong L, Kemper P, Hill JL, Nimtz J, Rinker B, Vasconez HC. Comparison of sterile versus nonsterile acellular dermal matrices for breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70:497–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Israeli Ben-noon H, Farber N, Weissman O, et al. The effect of acellular dermal matrix on drain secretions after immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2013;47:308–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hanna KR, DeGeorge BR, Mericli AF, Lin KY, Drake DB. Comparison study of two types of expander-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70:10–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Michelotti BF, Brooke S, Mesa J, et al. Analysis of clinically significant seroma formation in breast reconstruction using acellular dermal grafts. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;71:274–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weichman KE, Wilson SC, Saadeh PB, Hazen A, Levine JP, Choi M, Karp NS. Sterile “ready-to-use” AlloDerm decreases postoperative infectious complications in patients undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:725–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Adkinson JM, Miller NF, Eid SM, Miles MG, Murphy RX. Tissue expander complications predict permanent implant complications and failure of breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;75:24–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Forsberg CG, Kelly DA, Wood BC, et al. Aesthetic outcomes of acellular dermal matrix in tissue expander/implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72:S116–S20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kilchenmann AJ, Lardi AM, Ho-Asjoe M, Junge K, Farhadi J. An evaluation of resource utilisation of single stage porcine acellular dermal matrix assisted breast reconstruction: a comparative study. Breast. 2014;23:876–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Liu DZ, Mathes DW, Neligan PC, Said HK, Louie O. Comparison of outcomes using AlloDerm versus FlexHD for implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72:503–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sbitany H, Wang F, Peled AW, Alvarado M, Ewing CA, Esserman LJ, Foster RD. Tissue expander reconstruction after total skin-sparing mastectomy. Ann Plast Surg. 2014. doi: 10.1097/sap.0000000000000292.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, Medford-Davis L, Hertl C, Austen WG, Jr. Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1170–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bravata DM, Olkin I. Simple pooling versus combining in meta-analysis. Eval Health Prof. 2001;24:218–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mendenhall SD, Anderson LA, Ying J, Boucher KM, Liu T, Neumayer LA, Agarwal JP. The BREASTrial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135:29e–42e.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Heyer K, Buck DW, 2nd, Kato C, Khan SA, Alam M, Kim JY. Reversed acellular dermis: failure of graft incorporation in primary tissue expander breast reconstruction resulting in recurrent breast cellulitis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:66e–8e.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lardi AM, Ho-Asjoe M, Mohanna P-N, Farhadi J. Immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: Factors affecting outcome. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67:1098–105.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ganske I, Verma K, Rosen H, Eriksson E, Chun YS. Minimizing complications with the use of acellular dermal matrix for immediate implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;71:464–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Davila AA, Seth AK, Wang E, Hanwright P, Bilimoria K, Fine N, Kim JYS. Human acellular dermis versus submuscular tissue expander breast reconstruction: a multivariate analysis of short-term complications. Arch Plast Surg. 2013;40:19–27.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ibrahim AM, Shuster M, Koolen PG, et al. Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database in 19,100 patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:1057–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Pannucci CJ, Antony AK, Wilkins EG. The impact of acellular dermal matrix on tissue expander/implant loss in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:1–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Basu CB, Jeffers L. The role of acellular dermal matrices in capsular contracture. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130:118S–24S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Moyer HR, Pinell-White X, Losken A. The effect of radiation on acellular dermal matrix and capsule formation in breast reconstruction: clinical outcomes and histologic analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133:214–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Leong M, Basu CB, Hicks MJ. Further evidence that human acellular dermal matrix decreases inflammatory markers of capsule formation in implant-based breast reconstruction. Aesthet Surg J. 2015;35:40–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Basu CB, Leong M, Hicks MJ. Acellular cadaveric dermis decreases the inflammatory response in capsule formation in reconstructive breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:1842–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plastic Surgery, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations