TY - JOUR
T1 - Efficacy of Acellular Dermal Matrix Type in Treatment of Capsular Contracture in Breast Augmentation
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
AU - Samuels, Kaitlyn
AU - Millet, Emily
AU - Wong, Lesley
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Aesthetic Society. All rights reserved.
PY - 2024/1/1
Y1 - 2024/1/1
N2 - Background: Capsular contracture is a known complication of breast augmentation and is among the top reasons for revisional breast augmentation procedures. The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been shown to reduce the rate of capsular contracture in breast reconstruction and augmentation, theorizing that it acts as a protective barrier between the implant capsule and inflammatory process responsible for capsular contracture. The role of ADM in treatment of capsular contracture has been investigated in numerous studies, with a variety of ADMs. Objectives: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of existing literature on the use of ADM for treatment of capsular contracture in aesthetic breast augmentation patients to investigate differences in efficacy of ADM types. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically reviewed for articles pertaining to capsular contracture, acellular dermal matrices, and breast augmentation. Number of patients, type of ADM, Baker grade, follow-up time, complication rate, and capsular contracture rate were recorded from identified articles. Data was pooled from studies to calculate a capsular contracture rate for each ADM type, with a chi-squared test performed for analysis. Identified studies with a comparative group were included in a meta-analysis utilizing risk ratio (RR) to assess the efficacy of ADM. Results: Nine articles including ADM for treatment of capsular contracture in breast augmentation met criteria for inclusion, with a total of 481 breasts. Strattice was the most commonly utilized ADM (n = 391), followed by AlloDerm (n = 57). There was a statistically significant difference in efficacy of ADM among the studied ADM types (P <. 001). AlloDerm, FlexHD, and DermaMatrix had the lowest capsular contracture rates (0%). NeoForm and SurgiMend had the highest capsular contracture rates (each 25%, but with n = 4 and n = 8, respectively). Strattice had a capsular contracture rate of 1.53% in the pooled data, and meta-analysis showed that Strattice reduced the risk of capsular contracture (RR 0.14 [95% CI 0.06, 0.31]) compared with conventional treatment. Conclusions: Acellular dermal matrices appear to be effective at treating capsular contracture after breast augmentation while maintaining a low complication rate. Overall capsular contracture rates are low with the use of ADM. There is a statistically significant difference in efficacy among ADM types. Meta-analysis shows that Strattice is effective at reducing the risk of capsular contracture in breast augmentation patients when compared to conventional treatment. Future research, especially in the form of randomized controlled trials, is needed to further investigate the efficacy of various ADMs in the treatment of capsular contracture.
AB - Background: Capsular contracture is a known complication of breast augmentation and is among the top reasons for revisional breast augmentation procedures. The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been shown to reduce the rate of capsular contracture in breast reconstruction and augmentation, theorizing that it acts as a protective barrier between the implant capsule and inflammatory process responsible for capsular contracture. The role of ADM in treatment of capsular contracture has been investigated in numerous studies, with a variety of ADMs. Objectives: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of existing literature on the use of ADM for treatment of capsular contracture in aesthetic breast augmentation patients to investigate differences in efficacy of ADM types. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically reviewed for articles pertaining to capsular contracture, acellular dermal matrices, and breast augmentation. Number of patients, type of ADM, Baker grade, follow-up time, complication rate, and capsular contracture rate were recorded from identified articles. Data was pooled from studies to calculate a capsular contracture rate for each ADM type, with a chi-squared test performed for analysis. Identified studies with a comparative group were included in a meta-analysis utilizing risk ratio (RR) to assess the efficacy of ADM. Results: Nine articles including ADM for treatment of capsular contracture in breast augmentation met criteria for inclusion, with a total of 481 breasts. Strattice was the most commonly utilized ADM (n = 391), followed by AlloDerm (n = 57). There was a statistically significant difference in efficacy of ADM among the studied ADM types (P <. 001). AlloDerm, FlexHD, and DermaMatrix had the lowest capsular contracture rates (0%). NeoForm and SurgiMend had the highest capsular contracture rates (each 25%, but with n = 4 and n = 8, respectively). Strattice had a capsular contracture rate of 1.53% in the pooled data, and meta-analysis showed that Strattice reduced the risk of capsular contracture (RR 0.14 [95% CI 0.06, 0.31]) compared with conventional treatment. Conclusions: Acellular dermal matrices appear to be effective at treating capsular contracture after breast augmentation while maintaining a low complication rate. Overall capsular contracture rates are low with the use of ADM. There is a statistically significant difference in efficacy among ADM types. Meta-analysis shows that Strattice is effective at reducing the risk of capsular contracture in breast augmentation patients when compared to conventional treatment. Future research, especially in the form of randomized controlled trials, is needed to further investigate the efficacy of various ADMs in the treatment of capsular contracture.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85179851805&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85179851805&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/asj/sjad265
DO - 10.1093/asj/sjad265
M3 - Article
C2 - 37595294
AN - SCOPUS:85179851805
SN - 1090-820X
VL - 44
SP - 26
EP - 35
JO - Aesthetic Surgery Journal
JF - Aesthetic Surgery Journal
IS - 1
ER -