Early Experience with Synthetic Monofilament Polydioxanone Mesh in Primary Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Matched Analysis.

IF 1.4 Q3 SURGERY
Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS Pub Date : 2026-06-17 eCollection Date: 2026-07-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2850-0163
Puja Jagasia, Reena Sulkar, Anna Whitney, John Y S Kim
{"title":"Early Experience with Synthetic Monofilament Polydioxanone Mesh in Primary Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Matched Analysis.","authors":"Puja Jagasia, Reena Sulkar, Anna Whitney, John Y S Kim","doi":"10.1055/a-2850-0163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polydioxanone (PDS) mesh is an emerging technology for prosthetic breast reconstruction. However, there is a paucity of data on its safety and efficacy in primary breast reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Demographic and outcomes measures from consecutive, immediate prosthetic breast reconstructions using PDS or acellular dermal matrix (ADM) from a single surgeon were evaluated on a <i>per-breast</i> basis between 2013 and 2023. Propensity matching based on demographic variables was conducted. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of the mesh.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 796 breast reconstructions were identified, and propensity matching yielded 192 ADM and 48 PDS mesh reconstructions. There was no significant difference with respect to age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, smoking history, diabetes, mastectomy indication, radiation, chemotherapy, expander plane, and mastectomy type between propensity matched cohorts. Body mass index (BMI) varied by 2.1 points (ADM: 25.8 vs. PDS: 23.7, <i>p</i>  = 0.01). Mean follow-up time was 13.5 ± 2.7 months. The propensity-matched PDS mesh cohort had lower rates of any complication (ADM: 23.9% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, <i>p</i>  = 0.003), seroma (ADM: 11.4% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, <i>p</i>  = 0.01), expander exposure (ADM: 12.5% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, <i>p</i>  = 0.01), complication-associated expander removal (ADM: 9.9% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, <i>p</i>  = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (ADM: 14.0% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, <i>p</i>  = 0.05). PDS mesh, compared to ADM, was independently associated with decreased risk of any complication (OR: 0.443, <i>p</i>  = 0.02), seroma (odds ratio [OR]: 0.456, <i>p</i>  = 0.03), expander exposure (OR: 0.277, <i>p</i>  = 0.03), complication-associated expander removal (OR: 0.211, <i>p</i>  = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (OR: 0.12, <i>p</i>  = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PDS mesh is an alternative to ADM in primary prosthetic breast reconstruction. Rates of complication-including infection, seroma, and explantation-suggest an acceptable safety profile relative to ADM.</p>","PeriodicalId":47543,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS","volume":"53 4","pages":"321-330"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13496217/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2850-0163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Polydioxanone (PDS) mesh is an emerging technology for prosthetic breast reconstruction. However, there is a paucity of data on its safety and efficacy in primary breast reconstruction.

Methods: Demographic and outcomes measures from consecutive, immediate prosthetic breast reconstructions using PDS or acellular dermal matrix (ADM) from a single surgeon were evaluated on a per-breast basis between 2013 and 2023. Propensity matching based on demographic variables was conducted. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of the mesh.

Results: A total of 796 breast reconstructions were identified, and propensity matching yielded 192 ADM and 48 PDS mesh reconstructions. There was no significant difference with respect to age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, smoking history, diabetes, mastectomy indication, radiation, chemotherapy, expander plane, and mastectomy type between propensity matched cohorts. Body mass index (BMI) varied by 2.1 points (ADM: 25.8 vs. PDS: 23.7, p  = 0.01). Mean follow-up time was 13.5 ± 2.7 months. The propensity-matched PDS mesh cohort had lower rates of any complication (ADM: 23.9% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, p  = 0.003), seroma (ADM: 11.4% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p  = 0.01), expander exposure (ADM: 12.5% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p  = 0.01), complication-associated expander removal (ADM: 9.9% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p  = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (ADM: 14.0% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, p  = 0.05). PDS mesh, compared to ADM, was independently associated with decreased risk of any complication (OR: 0.443, p  = 0.02), seroma (odds ratio [OR]: 0.456, p  = 0.03), expander exposure (OR: 0.277, p  = 0.03), complication-associated expander removal (OR: 0.211, p  = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (OR: 0.12, p  = 0.04).

Conclusion: PDS mesh is an alternative to ADM in primary prosthetic breast reconstruction. Rates of complication-including infection, seroma, and explantation-suggest an acceptable safety profile relative to ADM.

早期经验合成单丝聚二恶酮网在乳房重建:倾向匹配分析。
背景:聚二氧环酮(PDS)补片是一种新兴的乳房假体重建技术。然而,缺乏关于其在原发性乳房重建中的安全性和有效性的数据。方法:在2013年至2023年期间,对单个外科医生使用PDS或脱细胞真皮基质(ADM)进行的连续、即时假体乳房重建的人口统计学和结果进行评估。基于人口统计学变量进行倾向匹配。采用二元逻辑回归分析来评估网格的影响。结果:共鉴定出796例乳房重建,倾向匹配得到192例ADM和48例PDS网状重建。在倾向匹配的队列中,年龄、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)状态、吸烟史、糖尿病、乳房切除术指征、放疗、化疗、扩张器平面和乳房切除术类型没有显著差异。身体质量指数(BMI)相差2.1点(ADM: 25.8 vs. PDS: 23.7, p = 0.01)。平均随访时间13.5±2.7个月。倾向匹配的PDS补片组并发症发生率较低(ADM: 23.9% vs. PDS补片:4.2%,p = 0.003)、血清瘤(ADM: 11.4% vs. PDS补片:0%,p = 0.01)、扩张器暴露(ADM: 12.5% vs. PDS补片:0%,p = 0.01)、并发症相关扩张器移除(ADM: 9.9% vs. PDS补片:0%,p = 0.02)和乳房切除术皮瓣坏死(ADM: 14.0% vs. PDS补片:4.2%,p = 0.05)。与ADM相比,PDS补片与任何并发症(OR: 0.443, p = 0.02)、血肿(优势比[OR]: 0.456, p = 0.03)、扩张器暴露(OR: 0.277, p = 0.03)、并发症相关扩张器移除(OR: 0.211, p = 0.02)和乳房切除术皮瓣坏死(OR: 0.12, p = 0.04)的风险降低独立相关。结论:PDS补片可替代ADM进行一期假乳重建。并发症的发生率——包括感染、血肿和解释——表明相对于ADM具有可接受的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
131
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书