Published – Breast Reconstruction
NEW
Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Mastectomy and Implant-Based Prepectoral Reconstruction Using TIGR® Synthetic Mesh
Shiveta Razdan 1, 2 , Goran A. Ahmed 2, Gayatri Vishwakarma 3, Chwanrow Baban 4, 2, Alexandra Tenovici 2
1. Breast Surgery, Amrita Institute of Medical Science and Research, Faridabad, IND 2. Breast Surgery, Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, Surrey, GBR 3. Biostatistics, Zydus Research Centre, Ahmedabad, IND 4. Breast Surgery, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, IRL
Published: May 25, 2024
Comparing Complications of Biologic and Synthetic Mesh in Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
Young-Soo Choi, MD, Hi-Jin You, MD, PhD, Tae-Yul Lee, MD, PhD, Deok-Woo Kim, MD, PhD
Arch Plast Surg 2023;50:3–9.
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan,
Republic of Korea
Are patients most satisfied with a synthetic or a biological mesh in dual-plane immediate breast reconstruction after 5 years? A randomized controlled trial comparing the two meshes in the same patient
Anna Paganini, Susanne Meyer, Håkan Hallberg, Emma Hansson
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery 75 (2022) 4133–4143Received 8 April 2022; accepted 16 August 2022
Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Pre-Pectoral or Sub-Pectoral Implant: Assessing Clinical Practice, Post-Surgical Outcomes, Patient’s Satisfaction and Cost
Gilles Houvenaeghel, Monique Cohen, Laura Sabiani, Aurore Van Troy, Olivia Quilichini, Axelle Charavil, Max Buttarelli, Sandrine Rua, Agnès Tallet, Alexandre de Nonneville, Marie Bannier
Fortune Journals
Houvenaeghel G et al., J Surg Res 2022
DOI: 10.26502/jsr.10020250
Abstract
A Retrospective Study Assessing the Outcomes of Immediate Prepectoral and Subpectoral Implant and Mesh-Based Breast Reconstruction
Thomas Wow 1 , Agnieszka Kolacinska-Wow 2,3,*, MateuszWichtowski 1 , Katarzyna Boguszewska-Byczkiewicz 3 , Zuzanna Nowicka 4 , Katarzyna Ploszka 4 , Karolina Pieszko 1,5 and Dawid Murawa
Abstract
First-year complications after immediate breast reconstruction with a biological and a synthetic mesh in the same patient: A randomized controlled study
Hansson, E., Edvinsson, A‐C., Elander, A., Kölby, L., Hallberg, H.
J Surg Oncol. 2021;123:80–88
〉〉 External website
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.26227
Abstract
Drain secretion and seroma formation after immediate breast reconstruction with a biological and a synthetic mesh, respectively: A randomized controlled study
Emma Hansson MD, Ann-Chatrin Edvinsson, Håkan Hallberg MD, PhD
Breast J. 2020;26:1756–1759
〉〉 External website
DOI: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/tbj.13921
Abstract
Prepectoral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with complete ADM or synthetic mesh coverage – 36-Months follow-up in 200 reconstructed breasts
Reitsamera, R., Peintingerb, F., Klaassen-Federspiela, F., Andreas, S.
The Breast: September 03, 2019
〉〉 External website
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2019.08.002
Reconstruction mammaire prothéthique immédiate avec matrice synthétique resorbable
Marthan, J. (2019)
Thèse de doctorat, Université Paris Diderot, Dr Jessica Marthan, Institut Gustave Roussy
Abstract
Comparison of inflammatory response and synovial metaplasia in immediate breast reconstruction with a synthetic and a biological mesh: a randomized controlled clinical trial
Hallberg, H., Hansson, E., Burian, P. (2019)
〉〉 External website
DOI: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2000656X.2019.1704766
Abstract
Immediate implant reconstruction using absorbable TIGR mesh after nipple-sparing mastectomy
Edel Marie Quinn, Mitchel Barry & Malcolm Kell
Abstract
TIGR® Matrix surgical mesh – a two-year follow-up study and complication analysis in 65 immediate breast reconstructions
Hallberg, H., Lewin, R., Elander, A., Hansson, E. (2018).
〉〉 External website
DOI: 10.1080/2000656X.2018.1478841
Abstract
The Use of TIGR Matrix in Breast Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery : Is a resorbable Synthetic Mesh a Viable Alternative to Acellular Dermal Matrices?
Stefano Pompei, MD, Dora Evangelidou,MD, MRM, Floriana Arelli, MD, Gianluigi Ferrante, MD, MSc
〉〉 External website
DOI:10.1016/j.cps.2017.08.005. Epub 2017 Sep 18.
Abstract
De novo experience of resorbable woven mesh in immediate breast reconstruction post-mastectomy
Sharma, S., Van Barsel, S., Barry, M., Kell, R.M. (2016).
〉〉 External website
DOI:10.1007/s00238-016-1227-1
Abstract
Bi-pedicle nipple-sparing mastectomy (modified Letterman technique) and TIGR mesh-assisted immediate implant reconstruction, in a patient with Cowden syndrome
Todd, J. (2016)
〉〉 External website
Abstract
Immediate implant-based breast reconstruction using the TIGR Matrix
Peter Schrenk (2016)
〉〉 External website
DOI:10.22177bmt-2016-0003
Abstract
The Use of Synthetic Mesh in Reconstructive, Revision and Cosmetic Breast Surgery
Becker, H., Lind, JG. (2013)
〉〉 External website
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-013-0171-8
Abstract
Three-year results from a preclinical implantation study of a long-term resorbable surgical mesh with time-dependent mechanical characteristics
Hjort, H., Mathisen, T., Alves, A., Clermont, G., Boutrand, J. P. ; Hernia volume 16, pages191–197, 2012
〉〉External website Doi: 10.1007/s10029-011-0885-y
The ideal matrix for Breast Reconstruction with implant.
Pre-pectoral (3D film)
- An implant is placed above the pectoralis major muscle and TIGR Matrix supports and stabilizes the implant. TIGR Matrix promotes soft tissue repair and long-term support.
- Complete coverage or anterior coverage of the implant with TIGR Matrix is possible.
- The prepectoral procedure allows for better quality of life for the patient with less postoperative pain.
- Immediate reconstruction after a mastectomy is possible, allowing the patient to recover faster, have a better body image as well as obtaining satisfying aesthetic outcome.