29089 Is There a Preferable Acellular Dermal Matrix - Breast Implants Match : A Comparative Electron Microscopy Scanning of Two Different Implant-Matrix Interfaces

Sunday, September 25, 2016: 1:25 PM
Alain M Danino, MD, PhD, FRCS , Plastic Surgery, Montreal University, Montreal, QC, Canada
Maxime Moreau, phd , plastic surgery, montreal university hospital, montreal, QC, Canada
Sophie Cassier, md , plastic surgery, montreal university hospital, montreal, QC, Canada
Charles Maalouf, md , plastic surgery, University of Montreal, montreal, QC, Canada
Christina Bernier, md , plastic surgery, montreal university hospital, montreal, QC, Canada
Alain Gagnon, md , plastic surgery, montreal university hospital, montreal, QC, Canada
Joseph Bou-Merhi, MD , Plastic Surgery, Montreal University, Montreal, QC, Canada
Ali Izadpanah, MD, CM, MSc, FRCSC , Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Jean-Philippe Giot, MD, PhD , Plastic Surgery, University of Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

ntroduction

Our goal is to characterize the ultrastructure at the interface of two textured expanders (Allergan BIOCELL® and Mentor SILTEX®) and an Acellular Dermal Matrix Alloderm®, through a prospective randomized study, using scanning electron microscopy.

Methods

We prospectively included who had a two stages breast reconstruction with an acelullar dermal matrix Alloderm®. Five patients had a Mentor Siltex® expander and 5 had an Allergan Biocell ® expander.

 Two  1 cm2 periprosthetic capsule specimens were sampled en bloc with the implant  during expander to permanent implant exchange.  One at the junction between Alloderm®  and the pectoralis major muscle and one at the site of Alloderm ® All samples were analyzed under SEM using High Vacuum (HiVac) modes and  Energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) studies. Observations were charted in order to tally and objectivise three parameters: texture/cellularity /presence of biofilm and bacteria  

These measurements were performed using Adobe Photoshop software (Adobe® Photoshop® CS6 Extended). This software allows for measurements of distance between two points on an image with a 2% margin of error

Results:

In Group 1: Biocell®/Alloderm ®, We found  no macro texture ingrowth of the capsule on the pores of the textured implants (Velcro-effect) at the implant-matrix interface. And a strong bacterial colonization of the implant porous surface, with presence of biofilm in 3 cases.

In group 2 Siltex® / Alloderm ®, we found a smooth capsule surface but significantly less bacterial and no biofilm development

 

Conclusion

The lack of Velcro effect on the Biocell® implant in front of Alloderm ®,  facilitate bacterial seeding, propagation and the formation of a biofilm in 3 of the specimens.

The findings can help guide clinical decision making with regards to selecting the most optimal implant surface when employing an acelullar dermal matrix, in order to minimize long-term complications.