ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Comparing Cortiva Silhouette to AlloDerm for Use in Prepectoral Two-stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of Essence Human Acellular Dermal Matrix Compared With Other Products in Prepectoral Direct-to-implant Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- AlloDerm Versus Cortiva: A Multicenter Pooled Analysis of Clinical and Economic Outcomes in Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- AlloDerm® versus Cortiva® in implant-based breast reconstruction: framework for a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and economic outcomes.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) in implant-based breast reconstruction has become increasingly routine during the past 20 years. ADMs improve soft-tissue support, facilitate greater tissue expander (TE) fill volumes, and reduce rates of capsular contracture. As the ADM market continues to grow, outcomes studies are necessary to assess the risks and benefits of each product. In this study, we compare the performance of Cortiva Silhouette, the thinnest ADM widely available, to AlloDerm, commonly considered the industry standard. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 178 consecutive two-stage prosthetic breast reconstructions performed by the senior author. In every case, either Cortiva or AlloDerm was used to provide soft-tissue support during TE placement. Subjects were divided into Cortiva and AlloDerm cohorts and compared across patient characteristics and reconstructive outcomes variables. Results: During the study period, AlloDerm was used in 116 reconstructions; Cortiva was used in 62. After propensity score matching (62 AlloDerm, 62 Cortiva), Cortiva was associated with greater intraoperative and final TE fill volumes, as well as larger silicone implants. Cortiva was also associated with fewer complications overall, and fewer instances of mastectomy skin necrosis, delayed wound healing, and seroma. Conclusions: Cortiva Silhouette is noninferior to AlloDerm in terms of safety and providing soft-tissue support in prepectoral two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction. In this study, Cortiva supported greater TE fill volumes and larger silicone implants relative to AlloDerm and was associated with fewer complications.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.