A Comparative study of titanium-coated propylene mesh with acellular dermal matrix in implant based breast reconstruction
Association of Breast Surgery ePoster Library. McKenna A. 05/15/17; 166258; P127
Adrian McKenna
REGULAR CONTENT
Login now to access Regular content available to all registered users.
Abstract
Rate & Comment (0)
Background
Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting women in the Western world. Reconstructive surgery following mastectomy has been shown to improve self-esteem and quality of life. Implant based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most common approach used. Biological and synthetic meshes are utilised as adjuncts to reconstruction to improve aesthetic outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the short and medium-term outcomes for patients undergoing IBBR utilising these adjuncts following mastectomy.
Methods
A retrospective review of a single centre experience with implant based breast reconstruction was undertaken. Comparison of 2 consecutive cohorts of patients using either biological porcine acellular dermal matrix -StratticeTM ( May 2010 to September 2013) or synthetic titanized TiLOOP®Bra mesh (Jan 2013 to August 2015) was undertaken. Patients demographics, complications, and outcomes were analysed.
Results
One hundred and fourteen cases of implant based breast reconstructions were performed between 2010 and 2015 at a Regional tertiary referral centre. Seventy-nine patients had TiLOOP®Bra based breast reconstructions and 35 had Strattice™ ADM breast reconstructions. Median follow up was 37 months in the Strattice™ ADM cohort and 18 months in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. . Implant explantation rate was 6% in both cohorts. Complication rates in the Strattice™ ADM cohort was 22% and 18% in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. There was no significant difference in post-operative complication rates between the 2 groups (p= 0.608).
Conclusion
This study suggests that there is no significant difference in post-operative outcome when using a synthetic TiLOOP®Bra mesh compared to a biological ADM mesh.
Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting women in the Western world. Reconstructive surgery following mastectomy has been shown to improve self-esteem and quality of life. Implant based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most common approach used. Biological and synthetic meshes are utilised as adjuncts to reconstruction to improve aesthetic outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the short and medium-term outcomes for patients undergoing IBBR utilising these adjuncts following mastectomy.
Methods
A retrospective review of a single centre experience with implant based breast reconstruction was undertaken. Comparison of 2 consecutive cohorts of patients using either biological porcine acellular dermal matrix -StratticeTM ( May 2010 to September 2013) or synthetic titanized TiLOOP®Bra mesh (Jan 2013 to August 2015) was undertaken. Patients demographics, complications, and outcomes were analysed.
Results
One hundred and fourteen cases of implant based breast reconstructions were performed between 2010 and 2015 at a Regional tertiary referral centre. Seventy-nine patients had TiLOOP®Bra based breast reconstructions and 35 had Strattice™ ADM breast reconstructions. Median follow up was 37 months in the Strattice™ ADM cohort and 18 months in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. . Implant explantation rate was 6% in both cohorts. Complication rates in the Strattice™ ADM cohort was 22% and 18% in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. There was no significant difference in post-operative complication rates between the 2 groups (p= 0.608).
Conclusion
This study suggests that there is no significant difference in post-operative outcome when using a synthetic TiLOOP®Bra mesh compared to a biological ADM mesh.
Background
Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting women in the Western world. Reconstructive surgery following mastectomy has been shown to improve self-esteem and quality of life. Implant based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most common approach used. Biological and synthetic meshes are utilised as adjuncts to reconstruction to improve aesthetic outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the short and medium-term outcomes for patients undergoing IBBR utilising these adjuncts following mastectomy.
Methods
A retrospective review of a single centre experience with implant based breast reconstruction was undertaken. Comparison of 2 consecutive cohorts of patients using either biological porcine acellular dermal matrix -StratticeTM ( May 2010 to September 2013) or synthetic titanized TiLOOP®Bra mesh (Jan 2013 to August 2015) was undertaken. Patients demographics, complications, and outcomes were analysed.
Results
One hundred and fourteen cases of implant based breast reconstructions were performed between 2010 and 2015 at a Regional tertiary referral centre. Seventy-nine patients had TiLOOP®Bra based breast reconstructions and 35 had Strattice™ ADM breast reconstructions. Median follow up was 37 months in the Strattice™ ADM cohort and 18 months in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. . Implant explantation rate was 6% in both cohorts. Complication rates in the Strattice™ ADM cohort was 22% and 18% in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. There was no significant difference in post-operative complication rates between the 2 groups (p= 0.608).
Conclusion
This study suggests that there is no significant difference in post-operative outcome when using a synthetic TiLOOP®Bra mesh compared to a biological ADM mesh.
Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting women in the Western world. Reconstructive surgery following mastectomy has been shown to improve self-esteem and quality of life. Implant based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most common approach used. Biological and synthetic meshes are utilised as adjuncts to reconstruction to improve aesthetic outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the short and medium-term outcomes for patients undergoing IBBR utilising these adjuncts following mastectomy.
Methods
A retrospective review of a single centre experience with implant based breast reconstruction was undertaken. Comparison of 2 consecutive cohorts of patients using either biological porcine acellular dermal matrix -StratticeTM ( May 2010 to September 2013) or synthetic titanized TiLOOP®Bra mesh (Jan 2013 to August 2015) was undertaken. Patients demographics, complications, and outcomes were analysed.
Results
One hundred and fourteen cases of implant based breast reconstructions were performed between 2010 and 2015 at a Regional tertiary referral centre. Seventy-nine patients had TiLOOP®Bra based breast reconstructions and 35 had Strattice™ ADM breast reconstructions. Median follow up was 37 months in the Strattice™ ADM cohort and 18 months in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. . Implant explantation rate was 6% in both cohorts. Complication rates in the Strattice™ ADM cohort was 22% and 18% in the TiLOOP®Bra cohort. There was no significant difference in post-operative complication rates between the 2 groups (p= 0.608).
Conclusion
This study suggests that there is no significant difference in post-operative outcome when using a synthetic TiLOOP®Bra mesh compared to a biological ADM mesh.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}