Comparing the Outcome of Different Biologically Derived Acellular Dermal Matrices in Implant-based Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis of the Literatures.

backgroundAcellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have been used extensively in implant-based breast reconstruction. It was reported that due to the different sources and processing methods, the outcomes of ADMs in implant-based breast reconstructions are expected to differ. We designed this study to statistically analyze and discuss the outcome of 3 commonly used ADMs, Alloderm, Strattice, and Surgimend in implant-based breast reconstruction.

methodsComprehensive review of the literatures searched on electronic databases was done to identify studies published between 2006 and 2017 comparing the outcome of ADMs. Pooled random effect estimates for each complication and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. One-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni test were used to compare statistical significance between and within groups, respectively. Multiple linear regression was done to include confounding factors and R statistic program for forest plot.

resultsTwenty-one studies met the inclusion with a total of 1,659, 999, and 912 breasts reconstructions in Alloderm, Strattice, and Surgimend, respectively. Seven complications extracted including major and minor infection, seroma, implant loss, hematoma, capsular contracture, and localized erythema. Pooled total complication rates were 23.82% (95% CI, 21.18-26.47%) in Strattice, 17.98% (95% CI, 15.49-20.47%) in Surgimend, 16.21% (95% CI, 14.44-17.99%) in Alloderm. Seroma rate was the highest in Strattice group (8.61%; 95% CI, 6.87-10.35%). There was no statistical significance between and within groups.

conclusionAlthough Strattice exhibited a higher overall pooled complication rate compared with Alloderm and Surgimend, the incidence of individual complication varies between studies. A cost analysis of different ADMs may aid in choosing the type of ADMs to be used.