RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Single-use negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been shown to encourage wound healing. It is often used when patient factors impair wound healing, or in more complex wounds, such as in implant-based breast reconstruction. We report the findings of a prospective cohort study comparing the use of NPWT with standard dressings in prepectoral breast reconstruction. METHODS: A prospective database of implant-based reconstruction from a single institution was mined to identify patients who underwent prepectoral reconstruction. Patient demographics, operative data, surgical complications, and 90-day outcomes were compared between patients who had NPWT and those who had standard dressings. RESULTS: Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction was performed on 307 breasts. NPWT dressings were used in 126 cases, with standard dressings used in 181 cases. Wound breakdown occurred in 10 cases after standard dressings versus 1 where NPWT was utilized. Of the standard dressing cases, only 3 implants were salvaged, while 7 cases led to implant loss. The 1 case of wound breakdown in the NPWT cohort settled with conservative measures. The cost of a reconstructive failure was £14,902, and the use of NPWT resulted in a cost savings of £426 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of single-use NPWT reduces the rate of wound breakdown and implant loss in prepectoral implant-based reconstruction. In addition to the significant clinical benefits, this approach is cost-saving compared with standard dressings. These data suggest that prepectoral implant reconstruction should be considered as an indication for the use of NPWT.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In 2015, Artia™ (LifeCell, NJ), a new porcine acellular dermal matrix (ADM), was introduced at our unit. As there is lack of clinical studies on its use in breast reconstruction, the purpose of this prospective study was to assess outcome data for patients who underwent Artia™-assisted breast reconstruction. We compared these data with those of other studies of non-human ADMs in widespread use from the literature. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent Artia™-assisted breast reconstruction between July 2016 and February 2018 were identified. A prospective database was maintained, including data of patient demographics, type of reconstruction, type of implant, oncological data if applicable, complication rates and adjuvant treatment delays. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients undergoing 83 implant-based breast reconstructions with Artia™ were included in the study. Of the 83 reconstructions, 62% were performed following risk-reducing mastectomy, 28% following therapeutic mastectomy and 10% for revision procedures. After a mean 276-day follow-up period, the overall complication rate was 10.8%, including 6 breasts (7.2%) developing seromas requiring aspiration, 1 breast developing a haematoma (1.2%) and 2 implant losses (2.4%) in a single patient following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. There were no cases of wound dehiscence or erythema/red breast syndrome. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first studies demonstrating that Artia™-assisted implant-based breast reconstruction is associated with low and acceptable early complication rates. The results are promising and are comparable to our experience using established ADMs, with an implant loss rate of 4.9% across 500 ADM-assisted implant reconstructions.
