Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early Findings

Background:. Several acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) can be used to provide soft-tissue support for post- and prepectoral prosthetic breast reconstructions. Yet, several recent meta-analysis suggest that due to a lack of rigorous evaluation in the setting of head-to-head prospective randomized cont...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rajiv P. Parikh, MD, MPHS, Marissa M. Tenenbaum, MD, Yan Yan, MD, MA, MHS, PhD, Terence M. Myckatyn, MD, FRCSC, FACS
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer 2018-11-01
Series:Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
Online Access:http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002013
id doaj-c3dbf7f717ba4867a2c4d1ed00cb60e1
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c3dbf7f717ba4867a2c4d1ed00cb60e12020-11-25T01:23:29ZengWolters KluwerPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open2169-75742018-11-01611e201310.1097/GOX.0000000000002013201811000-00002Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early FindingsRajiv P. Parikh, MD, MPHS0Marissa M. Tenenbaum, MD1Yan Yan, MD, MA, MHS, PhD2Terence M. Myckatyn, MD, FRCSC, FACS3From the *Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo.From the *Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo.†Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo.From the *Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo.Background:. Several acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) can be used to provide soft-tissue support for post- and prepectoral prosthetic breast reconstructions. Yet, several recent meta-analysis suggest that due to a lack of rigorous evaluation in the setting of head-to-head prospective randomized control trials, few reliable conclusions regarding performance outcomes can be drawn. We compare Cortiva 1 mm to AlloDerm RTU in the setting of submuscular reconstruction in one study, and prepectoral in the second. Moreover, we present the findings from the interim analysis in our submuscular study. Methods:. Using a single-blinded prospective randomized control trial design, we compare outcomes in 180 patients undergoing submuscular breast reconstruction with 16 × 8 cm ADM support (either Cortiva 1 mm or AlloDerm RTU). A parallel study evaluates 16 × 20 cm sheets of these ADMs in 180 patients undergoing prepectoral reconstructions. Time to drain removal, complications, fill volumes, patient-reported outcomes, and narcotic consumption are prospectively evaluated. Results:. Interim analysis of 59 breasts in the submuscular study arm (Cortiva n = 31; AlloDerm n = 28) revealed no statistically significant differences with respect to outcome. At the time of interim analysis, the AlloDerm RTU group contained a higher proportion of never-smokers (P = 0.009), while patients implanted with Cortiva 1 mm received a larger tissue expander (P = 0.02). Conclusion:. We present a protocol for a robust randomized control trial to evaluate outcomes in both submuscular and prepectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction assisted by 2 distinct types of ADM. Our interim analysis reveals no evidence of inferiority of outcomes in a comparison of AlloDerm to Cortiva.http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002013
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Rajiv P. Parikh, MD, MPHS
Marissa M. Tenenbaum, MD
Yan Yan, MD, MA, MHS, PhD
Terence M. Myckatyn, MD, FRCSC, FACS
spellingShingle Rajiv P. Parikh, MD, MPHS
Marissa M. Tenenbaum, MD
Yan Yan, MD, MA, MHS, PhD
Terence M. Myckatyn, MD, FRCSC, FACS
Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early Findings
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
author_facet Rajiv P. Parikh, MD, MPHS
Marissa M. Tenenbaum, MD
Yan Yan, MD, MA, MHS, PhD
Terence M. Myckatyn, MD, FRCSC, FACS
author_sort Rajiv P. Parikh, MD, MPHS
title Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early Findings
title_short Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early Findings
title_full Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early Findings
title_fullStr Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early Findings
title_full_unstemmed Cortiva Versus AlloDerm Ready-to-use in Prepectoral and Submuscular Breast Reconstruction: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Study Design and Early Findings
title_sort cortiva versus alloderm ready-to-use in prepectoral and submuscular breast reconstruction: prospective randomized clinical trial study design and early findings
publisher Wolters Kluwer
series Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
issn 2169-7574
publishDate 2018-11-01
description Background:. Several acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) can be used to provide soft-tissue support for post- and prepectoral prosthetic breast reconstructions. Yet, several recent meta-analysis suggest that due to a lack of rigorous evaluation in the setting of head-to-head prospective randomized control trials, few reliable conclusions regarding performance outcomes can be drawn. We compare Cortiva 1 mm to AlloDerm RTU in the setting of submuscular reconstruction in one study, and prepectoral in the second. Moreover, we present the findings from the interim analysis in our submuscular study. Methods:. Using a single-blinded prospective randomized control trial design, we compare outcomes in 180 patients undergoing submuscular breast reconstruction with 16 × 8 cm ADM support (either Cortiva 1 mm or AlloDerm RTU). A parallel study evaluates 16 × 20 cm sheets of these ADMs in 180 patients undergoing prepectoral reconstructions. Time to drain removal, complications, fill volumes, patient-reported outcomes, and narcotic consumption are prospectively evaluated. Results:. Interim analysis of 59 breasts in the submuscular study arm (Cortiva n = 31; AlloDerm n = 28) revealed no statistically significant differences with respect to outcome. At the time of interim analysis, the AlloDerm RTU group contained a higher proportion of never-smokers (P = 0.009), while patients implanted with Cortiva 1 mm received a larger tissue expander (P = 0.02). Conclusion:. We present a protocol for a robust randomized control trial to evaluate outcomes in both submuscular and prepectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction assisted by 2 distinct types of ADM. Our interim analysis reveals no evidence of inferiority of outcomes in a comparison of AlloDerm to Cortiva.
url http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002013
work_keys_str_mv AT rajivpparikhmdmphs cortivaversusallodermreadytouseinprepectoralandsubmuscularbreastreconstructionprospectiverandomizedclinicaltrialstudydesignandearlyfindings
AT marissamtenenbaummd cortivaversusallodermreadytouseinprepectoralandsubmuscularbreastreconstructionprospectiverandomizedclinicaltrialstudydesignandearlyfindings
AT yanyanmdmamhsphd cortivaversusallodermreadytouseinprepectoralandsubmuscularbreastreconstructionprospectiverandomizedclinicaltrialstudydesignandearlyfindings
AT terencemmyckatynmdfrcscfacs cortivaversusallodermreadytouseinprepectoralandsubmuscularbreastreconstructionprospectiverandomizedclinicaltrialstudydesignandearlyfindings
_version_ 1725121976972869632