Universität zu Köln

Eichler, Christian, Efremova, Jeria, Brunnert, Klaus, Kurbacher, Christian M., Gluz, Oleg, Puppe, Julian and Warm, Mathias (2017). A Head to Head Comparison Between SurgiMend((R)) - Fetal Bovine Acellular Dermal Matrix and Tutomesh((R)) - A Bovine Pericardium Collagen Membrane in Breast Reconstruction in 45 Cases. In Vivo, 31 (4). S. 677 - 683. ATHENS: INT INST ANTICANCER RESEARCH. ISSN 1791-7549

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Background/Aim: The use of acellular dermal matrices (ADM) has become a widely used option in breast reconstruction. A great deal of literature is available, totaling over 3,200 ADM reconstructions. Head-to-head comparisons between SurgiMend (R) and Tutomesh (R) are not yet reported. These are the first comparative clinical data reported on the use of Tutomesh (R) in breast reconstruction. Postoperative complication rates and costs for these devices were evaluated. Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of a 2-year experience with both SurgiMend (R) - fetal bovine acellular dermal matrix and Tutomesh (R) - a bovine pericardium collagen membrane in breast reconstruction in 45 cases from 2014-2015. Results: Forty-five patients received a total of 45 implant-based reconstructions using SurgiMend (R) (18 cases; 40%) or Tutomesh (R) (27 cases; 60%). Gross complication rates were 27.8% for SurgiMend (R) and 37.0% for Tutomesh (R) including hematoma, postoperative skin irritation, infection, red breast syndrome and revision surgery. The most common complication was postoperative red breast syndrome. Severe complications requiring revision surgery did not differ significantly in patients treated with SurgiMend (R) (0 cases, 0%) compared to Tutomesh (R) (1 case, 3.7%). Conclusion: This retrospective analysis shows similar overall clinical complication rates for Tutomesh (R) and SurgiMend (R). Severe complication rates are comparable to those reported in literature for both products. Although the retrospective nature of this work limits its clinical impact, it is possible to opt for the cheaper alternative (Tutomesh (R)).

Item Type:	Journal Article
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID ORCID Put Code Eichler, Christian UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Efremova, Jeria UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Brunnert, Klaus UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Kurbacher, Christian M. UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Gluz, Oleg UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Puppe, Julian UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Warm, Mathias UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED
URN:	urn:nbn:de:hbz:38-226106
DOI:	10.21873/invivo.11112
Journal or Publication Title:	In Vivo
Volume:	31
Number:	4
Page Range:	S. 677 - 683
Date:	2017
Publisher:	INT INST ANTICANCER RESEARCH
Place of Publication:	ATHENS
ISSN:	1791-7549
Language:	English
Faculty:	Unspecified
Divisions:	Unspecified
Subjects:	no entry
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Keywords Language IMMEDIATE; ALLODERM; OUTCOMES Multiple languages Medicine, Research & Experimental Multiple languages
Refereed:	Yes
URI:	http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/id/eprint/22610