TY - JOUR
T1 - A comparative analysis of cryopreserved versus prehydrated human acellular dermal matrices in tissue expander breast reconstruction
AU - Seth, Akhil K.
AU - Persing, Scott
AU - Connor, Caitlin M.
AU - Davila, Armando
AU - Hirsch, Elliot
AU - Fine, Neil A.
AU - Kim, John Y.S.
PY - 2013/6/1
Y1 - 2013/6/1
N2 - Background: The use of human acellular dermal matrices (HADMs) in breast reconstruction has become routine practice for many reconstructive surgeons. Comparative studies between 2 more common iterations of human acellular dermis are scarce. Our study evaluated reconstructive outcomes of cryopreserved and prehydrated HADMs in comparative fashion. Methods: This study is a retrospective review of 369 consecutive tissue expander breast reconstructions performed by 2 board-certified plastic surgeons whose practice focuses on breast reconstruction. Data were collected independently by 2 reviewers, and a comparative analysis for statistical significance of outcomes was performed using the Fisher exact test, 2-tailed independent t tests, and regression analysis where appropriate. Results: Over a 5-year period, 255 patients (369 breasts) underwent breast reconstruction utilizing either cryopreserved or prehydrated HADM. Of the total, 136 breasts received cryopreserved and 233 breasts received prehydrated HADMs. The total complication rates for cryopreserved and prehydrated HADMs were 19.1% and 19.3% (P = 1.0), respectively. Additional complication rates were calculated for flap necrosis (8.1% vs 9.0%, P = 0.849), infection requiring intravenous antibiotics (10.3% vs 5.2%, P = 0.09), hematoma (2.9% vs 1.3%, P = 0.431), seroma (2.2% vs 1.0%, P = 1.0), expander exposure/ dehiscence (5.9% vs 6.4%, P = 1.0), and number of breasts requiring autologous reconstruction after a complication (4.4% vs 6.4%, P = 0.491). On regression analysis, HADM type was not an independent risk factor for any complication subtype. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that there are no significant differences in complication rates between cryopreserved and prehydrated HADMs.
AB - Background: The use of human acellular dermal matrices (HADMs) in breast reconstruction has become routine practice for many reconstructive surgeons. Comparative studies between 2 more common iterations of human acellular dermis are scarce. Our study evaluated reconstructive outcomes of cryopreserved and prehydrated HADMs in comparative fashion. Methods: This study is a retrospective review of 369 consecutive tissue expander breast reconstructions performed by 2 board-certified plastic surgeons whose practice focuses on breast reconstruction. Data were collected independently by 2 reviewers, and a comparative analysis for statistical significance of outcomes was performed using the Fisher exact test, 2-tailed independent t tests, and regression analysis where appropriate. Results: Over a 5-year period, 255 patients (369 breasts) underwent breast reconstruction utilizing either cryopreserved or prehydrated HADM. Of the total, 136 breasts received cryopreserved and 233 breasts received prehydrated HADMs. The total complication rates for cryopreserved and prehydrated HADMs were 19.1% and 19.3% (P = 1.0), respectively. Additional complication rates were calculated for flap necrosis (8.1% vs 9.0%, P = 0.849), infection requiring intravenous antibiotics (10.3% vs 5.2%, P = 0.09), hematoma (2.9% vs 1.3%, P = 0.431), seroma (2.2% vs 1.0%, P = 1.0), expander exposure/ dehiscence (5.9% vs 6.4%, P = 1.0), and number of breasts requiring autologous reconstruction after a complication (4.4% vs 6.4%, P = 0.491). On regression analysis, HADM type was not an independent risk factor for any complication subtype. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that there are no significant differences in complication rates between cryopreserved and prehydrated HADMs.
KW - Acellular Dermal Matrix
KW - Breast Reconstruction
KW - Complications
KW - Human Acellular Dermis
KW - Implant
KW - Outcomes
KW - Tissue Expander
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879112718&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879112718&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318250f0b4
DO - 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318250f0b4
M3 - Article
C2 - 23429218
AN - SCOPUS:84879112718
SN - 0148-7043
VL - 70
SP - 632
EP - 635
JO - Annals of Plastic Surgery
JF - Annals of Plastic Surgery
IS - 6
ER -