Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Use of Inguinal Hernia Mesh (DynaMesh-ENDOLAP) in Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction

  • Original Article
  • Breast Surgery
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The rate of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy is increasing, and providing enough coverage for the implant is mandatory; however the choice of appropriate mesh for implant coverage is controversial. Considering the high cost and the limited availability of breast-dedicated meshes in our country, we conducted this study to investigate the consequences of using a polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) mesh designed for endoscopic and laparoscopic hernia repair (ENDOLAP) as a coverage for breast prostheses in breast reconstruction.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed on data of patients who had underwent immediate implant-based breast reconstruction between 2012 and 2019. After skin sparing mastectomy and subpectoral implant insertion, the exposed lower and lateral parts were covered with the mesh.

Results

Seventy-nine reconstructions were performed on 62 patients. The average follow-up was 31.9 months (ranges 6–102 months). Postoperative complications including small flap necrosis (3.8%), seroma (8.9%), infection (5.1%), hematoma (3.8%), malposition (1.3%), rippling (1.3%), grade two and three capsular contracture (2.5%), and chronic pain (1.3%) occurred in 19% of the operated breasts. The complication rate requiring intervention was 5.3%, and no implant loss was observed. None of the patients who received radiation developed complications.

Conclusion

ENDOLAP mesh is a cost-effective and safe option for implant coverage in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction, with an acceptable complication rate.

Level of evidence III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay, J., Ervik, M., Lam, F., Colombet, M., Mery, L., Piñeros, M., Znaor, A., Soerjomataram, I. and Bray, F., (2020). Global cancer observatory: cancer today. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon. (https://gco.iarc.fr/today, accessed February 2021).

  2. Dieterich M, Angres J, Stachs A, Glass A, Reimer T, Gerber B, Stubert J (2015) Patient-report satisfaction and health-related quality of life in TiLOOP® Bra-assisted or implant-based breast reconstruction alone. Aesthetic Plast Surg 39(4):523–533

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Gómez-Modet, S. and Tejedor, L.,( 2020). Synthetic Mesh in Immediate Breast Reconstruction. In: Gómez-Modet, S. and Tejedor, L. Manchev L., Parikesit AA., Breast Cancer and Breast Reconstruction. Intechopen: London. pp 141-159.

  4. Gabriel A, Nahabedian MY, Maxwell GP, Storm T (2020) Spear’s surgery of the breast: Principles and Art. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 4th edn. Wolters Kluwer, Philadelphia, PA

    Google Scholar 

  5. Paepke S, Ohlinger R, Klein E, Thill M (2018) Prepectoral implant placement in plastic-reconstructive breast surgery–a contribution to the discussion. Senologie-Zeitschrift für Mammadiagnostik und-therapie 15(02):115–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Öttinger AP, Junge K, Schumpelick V (2002) PVDF as a new polymer for the construction of surgical meshes. Biomaterials 23(16):3487–3493

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bilsel Y, Abci I (2012) The search for ideal hernia repair; mesh materials and types. Int J Surg 10(6):317–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brooke S, Mesa J, Uluer M, Michelotti B, Moyer K, Neves RI, Potochny J (2012) Complications in tissue expander breast reconstruction: a comparison of AlloDerm, DermaMatrix, and FlexHD acellular inferior pole dermal slings. Ann Plast Surg 69(4):347–349

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ellis HL, Asaolu O, Nebo V, Kasem A (2016) Biological and synthetic mesh use in breast reconstructive surgery: a literature review. World J Surg Oncol. 2016(14):121. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-0874-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pompei S, Evangelidou D, Arelli F, Ferrante G (2017) The use of TIGR matrix in breast aesthetic and reconstructive surgery: is a resorbable synthetic mesh a viable alternative to acellular dermal matrices? Clin Plast Surg 45(1):65–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Machleidt A, Schmidt-Feuerheerd N, Blohmer JU, Ohlinger R, Kueper J, von Waldenfels G, Dittmer S, Paepke S, Klein E (2018) Reconstructive breast surgery with partially absorbable bi-component Seragyn® BR soft mesh: an outcome analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 298(4):755–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chun YS, Verma K, Rosen H, Lipsitz S, Morris D, Kenney P, Eriksson E (2010) Implant-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix and the risk of postoperative complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 125(2):429–436

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Dieterich M, Paepke S, Zwiefel K, Dieterich H, Blohmer J, Faridi A, Klein E, Gerber B, Nestle-Kraemling C (2013) Implant-based breast reconstruction using a titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TiLOOP Bra): a multicenter study of 231 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(1):8e–19e

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Tessler O, Reish RG, Maman DY, Smith BL, Austen WG Jr (2014) Beyond biologics: absorbable mesh as a low-cost, low-complication sling for implant-based breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 133(2):90e–99e

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rietjens M, De Lorenzi F, Venturino M, Petit JY (2005) The suspension technique to avoid the use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 54(5):467–470

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Schnarrs RH, Carman CM, Tobin C, Chase SA, Rossmeier KA (2016) Complication rates with human acellular dermal matrices: retrospective review of 211 consecutive breast reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 4(11):2016. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001118.November21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hallberg H, Lewin R, Elander A, Hansson E (2018) TIGR® matrix surgical mesh–a two-year follow-up study and complication analysis in 65 immediate breast reconstructions. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 52(4):253–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chowbey PK, Garg N, Sharma A, Khullar R, Soni V, Baijal M, Mittal T (2010) Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight mesh and heavyweight polypropylene mesh in endoscopic totally extraperitoneal groin hernia repair. Surg Endosc 24(12):3073–3079

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Potter S, Conroy EJ, Cutress RI, Williamson PR, Whisker L, Thrush S, Skillman J, Barnes NL, Mylvaganam S, Teasdale E, Jain A (2019) Short-term safety outcomes of mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with and without mesh (iBRA): a multicentre, prospective cohort study. The Lancet Oncol 20(2):254–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chen G, Zhang Y, Xue J, Zhu X, Liu C, Sun L, Gu X, Zhang H, Liu C (2019) Surgical outcomes of implant-based breast reconstruction using TiLoop Bra mesh combined with pectoralis major disconnection. Ann Plast Surg 83(4):396–400

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Momoh AO, Ahmed R, Kelley BP, Aliu O, Kidwell KM, Kozlow JH, Chung KC (2014) A systematic review of complications of implant-based breast reconstruction with prereconstruction and postreconstruction radiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 21(1):118–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Varghese J, Gohari SS, Rizki H, Langridge B, Kümmel S, Johnson L, Schmid P (2020) A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on complications following immediate breast reconstruction. Breast 55:55–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This study was performed with respect to the Declaration of Helsinki.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in public or commercial.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Breast Disease Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Ramesh Omranipour, Marzieh Mohammadizavieh & Sadaf Alipour

  2. Department of Surgical Oncology, Cancer Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Ramesh Omranipour

  3. Department of Surgery, Arash Women’s Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Marzieh Mohammadizavieh & Sadaf Alipour

Authors
  1. Ramesh Omranipour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marzieh Mohammadizavieh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sadaf Alipour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marzieh Mohammadizavieh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study at the time of admission.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Omranipour, R., Mohammadizavieh, M. & Alipour, S. Use of Inguinal Hernia Mesh (DynaMesh-ENDOLAP) in Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction. Aesth Plast Surg 46, 677–682 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02581-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02581-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation