journal article·2021-12Open access

Titanium-coated polypropylene mesh as innovative bioactive material in conservatives mastectomies and pre-pectoral breast reconstruction

Pietro Gentile, Marco Bernini, Lorenzo Orzalesi, Silvia Sordi, Icro Meattini, Francesca Lessi, Ashutosh Kothari, Claudio Calabrese

Bioactive Materials· Volume 6· Issue 12

Abstract

Breast reconstruction is rapidly evolving, thanks to the growing acceptance of synthetic meshes as innovative biomaterials. 276 patients undergoing mastectomy (total of 328 mastectomies) were analyzed in a retrospective observational study to evaluate the pre-pectoral immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) using an implant wrapped with Titanium-Coated Polypropylene Mesh (TCPM) vs. patients treated with tissue expander (TE), equally placed pre-pectorally (and wrapped with the same TCPM in 74.3% of the control group' breasts). 163 patients, of the study group (SG), underwent mastectomy and pre-pectoral IBR with implant wrapped with TCPM, in a one-step surgery, called direct-to-implant technique (DTI), while 113 patients control group (CG) underwent mastectomy and TE. DTI technique has been performed in 192 breasts of the SG while TE procedure in 136 breasts of the CG. The BREAST-Q questionnaire has been provided before the treatment and 2 years later. Baker scale has been used to evaluate capsular contracture. Oncologic, surgical, and aesthetic outcomes along with BREAST-Q scores were analyzed. Additionally, a histologic evaluation was conducted in 11 capsules' samples randomly chosen (6 derived from SG patients and 5 derived from CG). Complications were recorded in 43 cases (29SG-14CG): 8 skin-nipple necrosis (5SG-3CG), 8 wound dehiscence (6SG-2CG), 3 hematomas (1SG-2CG), and 24 infections (8SG-16CG). Grade IV capsular contracture was detected in 9 breasts (1SG-8CG), whereas 254 breasts were grade I (110SG-144CG), 33 (10SG-23CG) grade II, and 32 (4SG-28CG) grade III. Implant wrinkling was detected in 18 cases (10SG-8CG) after 30 months. The local tumor recurrence rate was 5.8%. Three recurrences were on the nipple-areola complex (1.9%). SG patients showed significantly higher rates in the BREAST-Q overall Satisfaction with Outcome (74.1), overall Satisfaction with Breasts (69.1), Psychosocial Well-being (81.9), and Sexual Well-being (63.1), versus CG's patients (p < 0.05). Histological analysis showed a process of normal tissue repair with a complete mesh integration and normal healing. Conservative mastectomies with pre-pectoral IBR assisted by TCPM proved themselves oncologically safe, biologically integrated into native tissues, and highly accepted in terms of quality of life guaranteeing a more natural and aesthetic breast appearance. CORE TIP: This retrospective observational study provided clinical and histological outcomes of the pre-pectoral IBR using an implant wrapped with TCPM vs. patients treated with TE, equally placed pre-pectorally. The efficacy of IBR using an implant wrapped with TCPM was confirmed by the cosmetic results obtained and by a rate of side effects comparable to TE. All the histological analyses performed confirmed the TCPM mesh complete integration with the physiological aspects of healing: The Collagen 1 and 3 expressions did not differ, between TCPM and NO TCPM samples to confirm a process of healing overlapping to perfect device incorporation and normal healing.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Breast Implant and Reconstruction · Reconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques · Surgical site infection prevention

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (46)

Show source-provided references
1. Breast cancer: from maximum tolerable to minimum effective treatment10.3389/fonc.2012.00125 ↗
2. Comparison of skin-sparing mastectomy versus non-skin-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d35bf8 ↗
3. Psychosocial and sexual well-being following nipple-sparing mastectomy and reconstruction10.1111/tbj.12542 ↗
4. Skin-sparing mastectomy. Oncologic and reconstructive considerations10.1097/00000658-199705000-00013 ↗
5. Skin-reducing mastectomy10.1097/01.prs.0000233024.08392.14 ↗
6. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: ten-year results of a randomized controlled study10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181c0e92a ↗
7. Reconstruction of the female breast following radical mastectomy10.1097/00006534-197106000-00008 ↗
8. Breast reconstruction with a subcutaneous tissue expander followed with a polyurethane- covered silicone breast implant10.1097/00000637-198806000-00003 ↗
9. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy using the temporary expander10.1097/00006534-198202000-00001 ↗
10. Breast reconstruction following mastectomy: a comparison of submuscular and subcutaneous techniques10.1097/00006534-198103000-00007 ↗
11. Selective use of serial expansion in breast reconstruction10.1097/00000637-198309000-00003 ↗
12. Immediate breast reconstruction using porcine acellular dermal matrix (Strattice™): long-term outcomes and complications10.1016/j.bjps.2012.10.015 ↗
13. Treatment of capsular contracture using complete implant coverage by acellular dermal matrix: a novel technique10.1097/PRS.0b013e31829acc1e ↗
14. Does acellular dermal matrix really improve aesthetic outcome in tissue expander/implant-based breast reconstruction?10.1007/s00266-015-0484-x ↗
15. TiLoop® Bra mesh used for immediate breast reconstruction: comparison of retropectoral and subcutaneous implant placement in a prospective single-institution series10.1007/s00238-014-1001-1 ↗
16. Evaluation of a novel breast reconstruction technique using the Braxon acellular dermal matrix: a new muscle-sparing breast reconstruction10.1111/ans.12849 ↗
17. Prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with porcine acellular dermal matrix: a new technique for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy10.1016/j.bjps.2014.10.012 ↗
18. Subcutaneous direct-to-implant breast reconstruction: surgical, functional, and aesthetic results after long-term follow-up10.1097/GOX.0000000000000533 ↗
19. Evaluation of prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with TiLoop Bra mesh for breast reconstruction: a prospective study on long-term and patient-reported BREAST-Q outcomes10.1097/PRS.0000000000005078 ↗
20. International research ethics10.1111/1467-8519.00187 ↗
21. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008 ↗
22. Risk of recurrence after treatment of early breast cancer with skin-sparing mastectomy: two editorial perspectives10.1007/BF02303839 ↗
23. Complications of mastectomy and their relationship to biopsy technique
24. The oncological safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review of the literature with a pooled analysis of 12,358 procedures10.5999/aps.2016.43.4.328 ↗
25. Do clinicopathological features of the cancer patient relate with nipple areolar complex necrosis in nipple-sparing mastectomy?10.1245/s10434-012-2677-8 ↗
26. American society of plastic surgeons statistics. Available at: h]p://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics. Accessed February 4th, 2016.
27. Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review of the literature with pooled analysis10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a48b8a ↗
28. Reconstruction of the female breast following radical mastectomy10.1097/00006534-197106000-00008 ↗
29. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy using the temporary expander10.1097/00006534-198202000-00001 ↗
30. The use of an integral tissue expander for primary breast reconstruction10.1007/BF01570854 ↗
31. Breast reconstruction following mastectomy: a comparison of submuscular and subcutaneous techniques10.1097/00006534-198103000-00007 ↗
32. Selective use of serial expansion in breast reconstruction10.1097/00000637-198309000-00003 ↗
33. Breast reconstructon with a subcutaneous tissue expander followed with a polyurethane-covered silicone breast implant10.1097/00000637-198806000-00003 ↗
34. Capsular contracture around saline-filled and textured subcutaneously-placed implants in irradiated and non-irradiated breast cancer patients: five years of monitoring of a prospective trial10.1016/j.bjps.2005.08.005 ↗
35. Subcutaneous tissue expansion and subsequent subpectoral implantation for breast reconstruction in Asian patients: safety and outcome10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182367bbe ↗
36. Revisiting an old place: single surgeon experience on post-mastectomy subcutaneous implant based breast reconstruction10.1097/01.prs.0000472382.57985.19 ↗
37. Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications10.1016/j.breast.2017.06.034 ↗
38. The largest multicentre data collection on prepectoral breast reconstruction: the iBAG study10.1002/jso.26073 ↗
39. Clinical, histological, and ultrasound follow-up of breast reconstruction with one-stage muscle-sparing "wrap" technique: a single-center experience10.1016/j.bjps.2017.06.023 ↗
40. Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review10.1186/s12957-016-0874-9 ↗
41. Direct to implant reconstruction in nipple sparing mastectomy: patient selection by preoperative digital mammogram10.1097/GOX.0000000000001369 ↗
42. Breast reconstruction actualized in nipple-sparing mastectomy and direct-to-implant, prepectoral polyurethane positioning: early experience and preliminary results
43. Immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix after conservative mastectomy: can a more effective alternative be used in the near future?
44. Direct to implant breast reconstruction with prepectoral micropolyurethane foam-coated implant: analysis of patient satisfaction
45. Drummond · 2005
46. Splitting the difference: using synthetic and biologic mesh to decrease cost in prepectoral immediate implant breast reconstruction10.1097/PRS.0000000000007638 ↗