Capsular Contracture in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Examining the Role of Acellular Dermal Matrix Fenestrations

BACKGROUND:Acellular dermal matrices have been proposed to decrease the incidence of capsular contracture in implant-based breast reconstructions. The authors have modified acellular dermal matrices with fenestrations to facilitate greater lower pole expansion and improve contour. The effect of fenestrations on the ability of matrices to suppress capsule formation, however, has not been examined. METHODS:A retrospective review of all fenestrated acellular dermal matrix–assisted, implant-based breast reconstructions performed by the two senior authors, with a minimum of 1-year follow-up after permanent implant placement, was completed. Patient demographics, details of extirpative and reconstructive procedures, and complications were examined. Capsular contractures were scored according to the Baker grading scale and compared to those reported in the literature. RESULTS:Thirty patients (50 breasts) underwent fenestrated acellular dermal matrix–assisted reconstruction, with mean follow-up times of 3.3 and 2.6 years after expander placement and implant exchange, respectively. Seven patients (23 percent) had a body mass index greater than 30 kg/m, three (10 percent) were active smokers, and six breasts (12 percent) were irradiated. Complications included one infection (2 percent), six cases (12 percent) of incisional superficial skin necrosis, and one (2 percent) tissue expander extrusion. Zero breasts had clinically significant Baker grade III/IV capsular contracture. The average Baker grade was 1.1. CONCLUSIONS:Fenestrated acellular dermal matrices decrease capsular contracture to rates similar to what is seen with nonfenestrated matrices. Further research is necessary to determine whether this observation is a result of decreased need for inferolateral acellular dermal matrix coverage to achieve these effects or modified physical interaction of acellular dermal matrices with surrounding soft tissues. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic, IV.