A Matched-Pair Analysis of Prepectoral with Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction: Is There a Difference in Postoperative Complication Rate? Plastic and reconstructive surgery Momeni, A., Remington, A. C., Wan, D. C., Nguyen, D., Gurtner, G. C. 2019; 144 (4): 801–7

Abstract

The development of acellular dermal matrices has revolutionized implant-based breast reconstruction. The most recent development has been the introduction of prepectoral breast reconstruction. However, concerns have been expressed related to the quality of soft-tissue coverage and infectious complications. Thus, the authors felt it prudent to perform a matched-pair analysis of clinical outcomes following prepectoral and subpectoral tissue expander placement.A retrospective study of patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction by means of prepectoral (group 1) and dual-plane subpectoral (group 2) tissue expander placement was performed. Patients in each group were matched for age, body mass index, history of radiotherapy, and type of acellular dermal matrix. Of note, patients in group 1 received perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for less than 24 hours, whereas patients in group 2 received antibiotic prophylaxis for at least 1 week.A total of 80 patients (138 breast reconstructions) were included in the study (group 1, n = 40; group 2, n = 40). No difference in total postoperative complication rate (p = 0.356) and mastectomy skin necrosis rate (p = 1.0) was noted. Observed differences in major complications (p = 0.06), major infection (p = 0.09), and loss of reconstruction (p = 0.09) were not found to be significant.Immediate prepectoral tissue expander insertion with anterior acellular dermal matrix coverage and less than 24 hours of antibiotic prophylaxis is safe and compares favorably to subpectoral tissue expander placement with an inferior acellular dermal matrix sling and a prolonged course of antibiotics.Therapeutic, III.

View details for DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006008

View details for PubMedID 31568276