Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: James Randall Patrinely, Jr, BA, Angel Farinas, MD, Bader Al-Majed, MD, Antonio Jorge Forte, MD, PhD, Sarvam TerKonda, MD, Galen Perdikis, MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer 2019-09-01
Series:Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
Online Access:http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002414
id doaj-be2c7453240045a2ae466327e5f414e1
record_format Article
spelling doaj-be2c7453240045a2ae466327e5f414e12020-11-25T03:51:26ZengWolters KluwerPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open2169-75742019-09-0179e241410.1097/GOX.0000000000002414201909000-00007Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast ReconstructionJames Randall Patrinely, Jr, BA0Angel Farinas, MD1Bader Al-Majed, MD2Antonio Jorge Forte, MD, PhD3Sarvam TerKonda, MD4Galen Perdikis, MD5From the *Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn.†Department of Plastic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.‡Department of Surgery, Maternity and Children Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia§Division of Plastic Surgery and Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Fla.¶Division of Plastic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Fla.†Department of Plastic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.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.http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002414
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author James Randall Patrinely, Jr, BA
Angel Farinas, MD
Bader Al-Majed, MD
Antonio Jorge Forte, MD, PhD
Sarvam TerKonda, MD
Galen Perdikis, MD
spellingShingle James Randall Patrinely, Jr, BA
Angel Farinas, MD
Bader Al-Majed, MD
Antonio Jorge Forte, MD, PhD
Sarvam TerKonda, MD
Galen Perdikis, MD
Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
author_facet James Randall Patrinely, Jr, BA
Angel Farinas, MD
Bader Al-Majed, MD
Antonio Jorge Forte, MD, PhD
Sarvam TerKonda, MD
Galen Perdikis, MD
author_sort James Randall Patrinely, Jr, BA
title Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_short Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_full Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_fullStr Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_sort acellular dermal matrix performance compared with latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap in expander-based breast reconstruction
publisher Wolters Kluwer
series Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
issn 2169-7574
publishDate 2019-09-01
description 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.
url http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002414
work_keys_str_mv AT jamesrandallpatrinelyjrba acellulardermalmatrixperformancecomparedwithlatissimusdorsimyocutaneousflapinexpanderbasedbreastreconstruction
AT angelfarinasmd acellulardermalmatrixperformancecomparedwithlatissimusdorsimyocutaneousflapinexpanderbasedbreastreconstruction
AT baderalmajedmd acellulardermalmatrixperformancecomparedwithlatissimusdorsimyocutaneousflapinexpanderbasedbreastreconstruction
AT antoniojorgefortemdphd acellulardermalmatrixperformancecomparedwithlatissimusdorsimyocutaneousflapinexpanderbasedbreastreconstruction
AT sarvamterkondamd acellulardermalmatrixperformancecomparedwithlatissimusdorsimyocutaneousflapinexpanderbasedbreastreconstruction
AT galenperdikismd acellulardermalmatrixperformancecomparedwithlatissimusdorsimyocutaneousflapinexpanderbasedbreastreconstruction
_version_ 1724487776827604992