Do we need acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral breast reconstruction? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are commonly used in prepectoral breast reconstruction. However, ADM is associated with high cost and potentially infection and seroma. Comparative studies on prepectoral reconstruction with and without ADM are limited to small, single-institution series. The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of prepectoral reconstruction with and without ADM. A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies comparing prepectoral reconstruction with and without ADM using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Pooled rates of patient demographics and outcomes were analyzed. Meta-analytic effect size estimates were calculated for reconstructive complications in studies comparing reconstruction with and without ADM. In total, 515 reconstructions from four studies were included. Most cases were nipple-sparing mastectomies and utilized tissue-expander reconstructions. Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the rate of complications between cohorts with and without ADM. Short-term complications included reconstructive failure (1.2% in ADM cohort and 2.8% in no-ADM), seroma (1.2% and 8.3%, respectively), hematoma (1.2% and 2.1%), infection (4.7% and 4.2%), and mastectomy flap ischemia and/or necrosis (2.4% and 5.2%). Long-term complications included rippling (3.3% in ADM and 5.1% in no-ADM cohorts) and capsular contracture (6.8% and 3.4%, respectively). This meta-analysis demonstrated no difference in the rate of complications between cases with and without ADM. However, the outcomes data from no-ADM reconstruction mostly reflect robust mastectomy flaps. Surgeon discretion as informed by specific clinical scenarios should guide decisions regarding the use of ADM in prepectoral breast reconstruction.