scholarly journals In Vitro Characterization of a Novel Human Acellular Dermal Matrix (BellaCell HD) for Breast Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 39
Author(s):  
Sun-Young Nam ◽  
Dayoung Youn ◽  
Gyeong Hoe Kim ◽  
Ji Hwa Chai ◽  
Hyang Ran Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tensile Strength ◽  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
The Other ◽  
Elongation Ratio ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Significant Discrepancy ◽  
Acellular Dermal

In the past, acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have been used in implant-based breast reconstruction. Various factors affect the clinical performance of ADMs since there is a lack of systematic characterization of ADM tissues. This study used BellaCell HD and compared it to two commercially available ADMs—AlloDerm Ready to Use (RTU) and DermACELL—under in vitro settings. Every ADM was characterized to examine compatibility through cell cytotoxicity, proliferation, and physical features like tensile strength, stiffness, and the suture tensile strength. The BellaCell HD displayed complete decellularization in comparison with the other two ADMs. Several fibroblasts grew in the BellaCell HD with no cytotoxicity. The proliferation level of fibroblasts in the BellaCell HD was higher, compared to the AlloDerm RTU and DermACELL, after 7 and 14 days. The BellaCell HD had a load value of 444.94 N, 22.44 tensile strength, and 118.41% elongation ratio, and they were higher than in the other two ADMs. There was no significant discrepancy in the findings of stiffness evaluation and suture retention strength test. The study had some limitations because there were many other more factors useful in ADM’s testing. In the study, BellaCell HD showed complete decellularization, high biocompatibility, low cytotoxicity, high tensile strength, high elongation, and high suture retention strengths. These characteristics make BellaCell HD a suitable tissue for adequate and safe use in implant-based breast reconstruction in humans.

In vitro and in vivo characterization of porcine acellular dermal matrix for gingival augmentation procedures

2013 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Pabst ◽  
A. Happe ◽  
A. Callaway ◽  
T. Ziebart ◽  
S. I. Stratul ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Porcine Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
In Vivo Characterization ◽  
Acellular Dermal

scholarly journals The Comparison of Breast Reconstruction Using Two Types of Acellular Dermal Matrix after Breast-Conserving Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (15) ◽  
pp. 3430
Author(s):  
Jeongshin An ◽  
Hyungju Kwon ◽  
Woosung Lim ◽  
Byung-In Moon ◽  
Nam Sun Paik
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
The Body ◽  
Surgical Time ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Specimen Weight ◽  
Breast Shape ◽  
Acellular Dermal

Breast reconstruction during breast-conserving surgery (BCS) can improve the breast shape. This study introduces breast reconstruction in BCS with two types of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). The study included 134 patients who underwent BCS due to breast cancer from February 2018 to May 2021. This study was conducted by one surgeon, and is the result of a three-year study. The patient group who underwent BCS using ADM was mainly targeted at patients with minor to severe defects after the operation. The average age of the patients was 51.8 years, and the body mass index (BMI) was 23.8 kg/m. The specimen weight was 30–120 g. The average surgical time, including reconstruction, was 100.4 min, combined with reconstruction. There were minor complications in six patients. The advantage of using ADM is that it can quickly correct the shape of the breast after conventional BCS surgery. Pellet-type ADM, rather than sheet-type, can create a breast shape similar to that before surgery. Breast reconstruction using ADM can be an easy and convenient method for making a better shape from BCS.

Minimizing Complications With the Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix for Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

2013 ◽  
Vol 71 (5) ◽  
pp. 464-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Ganske ◽  
Kapil Verma ◽  
Heather Rosen ◽  
Elof Eriksson ◽  
Yoon S. Chun
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Immediate Implant ◽  
Acellular Dermal

P105: Subpectoral and prepectoral implant based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix: An audit of surgical outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. e38
Author(s):  
Kirti Katherine Kabeer ◽  
Mihir Chandarana ◽  
Maria Prayle ◽  
Sadaf Jafferbhoy ◽  
Sekhar Marla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Acellular Dermal

Histologic Analysis of Fetal Bovine Derived Acellular Dermal Matrix in Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction

2013 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 447-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Gaster ◽  
Aaron J. Berger ◽  
Stefanie D. Monica ◽  
Robert T. Sweeney ◽  
Ryan Endress ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Tissue Expander ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Histologic Analysis ◽  
Fetal Bovine ◽  
Acellular Dermal

Citation Analysis in Breast Reconstruction Publications Between 2000 and 2010

2021 ◽  
pp. 229255032110499
Author(s):  
Rebecca Miller ◽  
Sheina Macadam ◽  
Daniel Demsey
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Citation Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Fat Grafting ◽  
Fat Graft ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Acellular Dermal

Introduction and Purpose: Breast reconstruction is an active area of plastic surgery research. Citation analysis allows for quantitative analysis of publications, with more citations presumed to indicate greater influence. We performed citation analysis to evaluate the most cited papers on breast reconstruction between 2000 to 2010 to identify contemporary research trends. Methods: The SCI-EXPANDED database was used to identify the 50 most cited papers. Data points included authorship, publication year, publication journal, study design, level of evidence, number of surgeons/institutions, center of surgery, primary outcome assessed, implant/flap/acellular dermal matrix/fat graft, acellular dermal matrix brand and use with implants/flaps, fat graft use with implants/flaps, unilateral/bilateral, one-/two-stage, immediate/delayed, number of patients/procedures, complications. Descriptive analysis of trends was performed based on results. Results: 20% of papers were published in 2006, 16% in 2007 and 12% in both 2004/2009. 66% were published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. The majority were retrospective or case series, and of Level III or IV evidence. The one Level I study was a prospective multicenter trial. 21 and 7 papers discussed procedures by single/multiple surgeons, respectively. Results from single/multiple centers were discussed in 18 and 6 papers, respectively. 30 papers discussed implant-based reconstruction, 22 papers flap-based (19 microsurgical), 15 papers acellular dermal matrix, and five papers fat grafting. The primary focus in the majority was complications or outcomes. Conclusion: Our analysis demonstrates continually evolving techniques in breast reconstruction. However, there is notable lack of high quality evidence to guide surgical decision-making in the face of increasing surgical options.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document