Skip Navigation LinksHome > May 2014 - Volume 72 - Issue 5 > Comparison of Outcomes Using AlloDerm Versus FlexHD for Impl...
Annals of Plastic Surgery:
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318268a87c
Breast Surgery

Comparison of Outcomes Using AlloDerm Versus FlexHD for Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

Liu, Daniel Z. MD; Mathes, David W. MD; Neligan, Peter C. MB, BChir; Said, Hakim K. MD; Louie, Otway MD

Collapse Box

Abstract

Background

Prosthetic reconstruction using human acellular dermis (ADM) is a common practice in breast reconstruction. AlloDerm and FlexHD are two different forms of ADM, each with unique characteristics. No studies have directly compared the postoperative complications of these 2 products.

Methods

The outcomes of 547 consecutive implant-based breast reconstructions were reviewed.

Results

Reconstruction was performed in 382 consecutive women (547 total breasts), employing mostly immediate reconstruction (81%). Mean follow-up was 6.4 months. Among immediate reconstructions, 165 used AlloDerm and 97 used FlexHD. Complications were similar by univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, smoking and higher initial implant fill were risk factors for delayed healing. The use of FlexHD, single-stage reconstruction, and smoking were independent risk factors for implant loss.

Conclusions

There is no significant difference in the complication rates between AlloDerm and FlexHD in immediate breast reconstruction. Multivariate analysis suggests that FlexHD may be a risk factor for implant loss.

Copyright © 2013 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Login

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.