A Nationwide Analysis Evaluating the Safety of Using Acellular Dermal Matrix with Tissue Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
Open Access
- 13 December 2022
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Georg Thieme Verlag KG in Archives of Plastic Surgery
- Vol. 49 (06) , 716-723
Abstract
Background In March 2021, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety communication cautioned against the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) products in breast reconstruction and reiterated that the FDA does not approve ADM use in breast surgery. This study aims to assess the safety of ADM use in breast reconstruction. Methods Women who underwent ADM and non-ADM assisted tissue expander (TE)-based breast reconstruction were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2012–2019). Trends of ADM use over time, and 30-day outcomes of surgical site infection (SSI), dehiscence, and unplanned reoperation were assessed. Results Of the 49,049 TE-based breast reconstructive cases, 42.4% were ADM assisted and 57.6% non-ADM assisted. From 2012 to 2019, the use of ADM increased from 26.1 to 55.6% (relative risk [RR] =1.10; p < 0.01). Higher rates of SSI (3.9 vs. 3.4%; p = 0.003) and reoperation (7.4 vs. 6.0%; p < 0.001) were seen in the ADM cohort. There was no significant difference seen in dehiscence rates (0.7 vs. 0.7%; p = 0.73). The most common reoperation within 30 days for the ADM group (17.6%) was removal of TE without insertion of implant (current procedural terminology: 11,971). ADM-assisted breast reconstruction was associated with increased relative risk of SSI by 10% (RR = 1.10, confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.21; p = 0.03) and reoperation by 15% (RR = 1.15, CI: 1.08–1.23; p < 0.001). Conclusions ADM-assisted breast reconstruction more than doubled from 2012 to 2019. There are statistically higher complication rates of SSI (0.5%) and reoperation (1.4%) with ADM use in TE-based breast reconstruction, suggesting that reconstruction without ADM is safe when comparing immediate postoperative outcomes.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Seroma in Prosthetic Breast ReconstructionPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2016
- Updated Evidence of Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Meta-analysisAnnals of Surgical Oncology, 2015
- Acellular Dermal Matrix in Reconstructive Breast SurgeryPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open, 2015
- Early Surgical Site Infection Following Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction with or without Acellular Dermal Matrix: National Benchmarking Using National Surgical Quality Improvement ProgramArchives of Plastic Surgery, 2015
- Economic Analysis and Review of the Literature on Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction With and Without the Use of the Acellular Dermal MatrixAesthetic Plastic Surgery, 2013
- Cost Analysis of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction With Acellular Dermal MatrixAnnals of Plastic Surgery, 2012
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Complications Associated With Acellular Dermal Matrix-Assisted Breast ReconstructionAnnals of Plastic Surgery, 2012
- Histologic Analysis of Angiogenesis and Lymphangiogenesis in Acellular Human DermisPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2008
- History of Breast ReconstructionSeminars in Plastic Surgery, 2004
- Breast Reconstruction Following MastectomyPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 1981