TY - JOUR
T1 - Low incidence of complications using polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) mesh in breast reconstruction
T2 - A systematic review
AU - Rodriguez-Unda, Nelson
AU - Leiva, Stephanie
AU - Cheng, Hsu Tang
AU - Seal, Stella M.
AU - Cooney, Carisa M.
AU - Rosson, Gedge D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2015/11/1
Y1 - 2015/11/1
N2 - Background Mastectomy and breast reconstruction are essential parts of the treatment of breast cancer. Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have been used for the reconstruction of the lower pole due to many advantages; however, its cost is seen as a major drawback in this era of concern for the allocation of health-care funds. Recently, polyglactin 910 (Vicryl; Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA) mesh has been published as an alternative. We assessed the published literature, in particular investigating for studies that compare Vicryl mesh with ADM. Methods We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Searched databases included Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Reviews, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials, and SCOPUS. Search criteria were as follows: (1) reporting of clinical data using Vicryl mesh in breast reconstruction, (2) reporting of original data, and (3) outcome of interest reported. Results We retrieved 290 de-duplicated articles. After title and abstract screening, we dismissed 258 articles, and thus full text was reviewed for 32 articles; only three retrospective articles met inclusion criteria. The total population included 112 patients and 156 breasts. The reported incidence of complications was as follows: infection 2.6% (confidence interval (CI): 0.7-6.6%), reconstruction failure 3.2% (CI: 1.0-7%), and seroma 1.3% (CI: 0.2-4.6%). A seven- to 12-fold cost difference was reported. Follow-up length ranged from 1.2 to 3.6 years. No studies directly compared Vicryl mesh with ADM. Conclusions Although the evidence is limited, polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) mesh for immediate breast reconstruction appears to be a potentially safe, effective, and less expensive alternative to ADM. Prospective studies are needed to further compare mesh with ADM.
AB - Background Mastectomy and breast reconstruction are essential parts of the treatment of breast cancer. Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have been used for the reconstruction of the lower pole due to many advantages; however, its cost is seen as a major drawback in this era of concern for the allocation of health-care funds. Recently, polyglactin 910 (Vicryl; Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA) mesh has been published as an alternative. We assessed the published literature, in particular investigating for studies that compare Vicryl mesh with ADM. Methods We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Searched databases included Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Reviews, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials, and SCOPUS. Search criteria were as follows: (1) reporting of clinical data using Vicryl mesh in breast reconstruction, (2) reporting of original data, and (3) outcome of interest reported. Results We retrieved 290 de-duplicated articles. After title and abstract screening, we dismissed 258 articles, and thus full text was reviewed for 32 articles; only three retrospective articles met inclusion criteria. The total population included 112 patients and 156 breasts. The reported incidence of complications was as follows: infection 2.6% (confidence interval (CI): 0.7-6.6%), reconstruction failure 3.2% (CI: 1.0-7%), and seroma 1.3% (CI: 0.2-4.6%). A seven- to 12-fold cost difference was reported. Follow-up length ranged from 1.2 to 3.6 years. No studies directly compared Vicryl mesh with ADM. Conclusions Although the evidence is limited, polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) mesh for immediate breast reconstruction appears to be a potentially safe, effective, and less expensive alternative to ADM. Prospective studies are needed to further compare mesh with ADM.
KW - Breast reconstruction
KW - Implant tissue expander
KW - Mastectomy
KW - Systematic review
KW - Vicryl mesh
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84955382042&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84955382042&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.bjps.2015.06.018
DO - 10.1016/j.bjps.2015.06.018
M3 - Article
C2 - 26275493
AN - SCOPUS:84955382042
SN - 1748-6815
VL - 68
SP - 1543
EP - 1549
JO - Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery
JF - Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery
IS - 11
ER -