Background: Even though meshes and matrices are widely used in breast reconstruction, there is little high-quality scientific evidence for their risks and benefits. The aim of this study was to compare first-year surgical complication rates in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction with a biological mesh with that of a synthetic mesh, in the same patient.
Methods: This study is a clinical, randomized, prospective trial. Patients operated on with bilateral mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction were randomized to biological mesh on one side and synthetic mesh on the other side.
Results: A total of 48 breasts were randomized. As the synthetically and the biologically reconstructed breasts that were compared belonged to the same woman, systemic factors were exactly the same in the two groups. The most common complication was seroma formation with a frequency of 38% in the biological group and 3.8% in the synthetical group (p = .011). A higher frequency of total implant loss could be seen in the biologic mesh group (8.5% vs. 2%), albeit not statistically significant (p = .083).
Conclusions: In the same patient, a synthetic mesh seems to yield a lower risk for serious complications, such as implant loss, than a biological mesh.
Keywords: TIGR; Veritas; acellular dermal matrix; complications; immediate breast reconstruction; synthetic mesh.
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Surgical Oncology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.