{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,15]],"date-time":"2025-08-15T00:46:31Z","timestamp":1755218791805,"version":"3.43.0"},"reference-count":20,"publisher":"Danish Medical Association","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Dan Med J"],"abstract":"<jats:p>INTRODUCTION. Immediate, implant-based breast reconstruction has become increasingly popular as a single-stage procedure with prepectoral placement of the implant following the introduction of biologic matrices. Only a few studies have described the use of bovine pericardium matrixTutomesh, a xenograft derived from bovine pericardium \u2013 and the use of laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography (ICG-A) to assess skin flap perfusion.\n\nMETHODS. All patients who underwent a mastectomy followed by immediate reconstruction using prepectoral direct-to-implant with bovine pericardium from July 2019 to June 2021 were included. Complications were registered using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Postsurgical complications were analysed with multivariate logistic regression and feature selection.\n\nRESULTS. A total of 81 prepectoral breast reconstructions were performed in 56 patients. The overall complication rate was 38.2%, and 14.3% required reoperation. Implant loss occurred in 3.7%. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated a statistically significant association between the risk of skin necrosis and previous breast surgery (p = 0.020) along with an increasing risk of implant rotation with increasing age (p = 0.010). The median follow-up was 9.9 months, and 11.1% of the breast reconstructions required postsurgical aesthetic correction.\n\nCONCLUSIONS. Bovine pericardium may be used in prepectoral breast reconstruction with a good outcome. Careful patient selection is crucial, and ICG-A is helpful in reducing the risk of post-surgical complications.\n\nFUNDING. None.\n\nTRIAL REGISTRATION. Not relevant.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.61409\/a08240522","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,25]],"date-time":"2025-03-25T09:00:13Z","timestamp":1742893213000},"page":"1-9","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction using bovine pericardium matrix"],"prefix":"10.61409","author":[{"given":"Thomas Takahashi","family":"Bentzon","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Maja","family":"Abu-Khalil","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Alessandro","family":"Venzo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Dina Reem","family":"Matzen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Tine Engberg","family":"Damsgaard","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"40208","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref0","unstructured":"American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Plastic Surgery Statistics Report. American Society of Plastic Surgeons, 2020. www.plasticsurgery.org\/documents\/News\/Statistics\/2020\/plastic-surgery-statistics-full-report-2020.pdf (20 May 2022)"},{"key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Chandarana M, Harries S. Multicentre study of prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix. BJS Open. 2020;4(1):71-7. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/bjs5.50236","DOI":"10.1002\/bjs5.50236"},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Abbate O, Rosado N, Sobti N et al. Meta-analysis of prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: guide to patient selection and current outcomes. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020;182(3):543-54. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10549-020-05722-2","DOI":"10.1007\/s10549-020-05722-2"},{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Masi\u00e0 J, iBAG Working Group. The largest multicentre data collection on prepectoral breast reconstruction: the iBAG study. J Surg Oncol. 2020;122(5):848-60. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/jso.26073","DOI":"10.1002\/jso.26073"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Liu J, Hou J, Li Z et al. Efficacy of acellular dermal matrix in capsular contracture of implant-based breast reconstruction: a single-arm meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2020;44(3):735-42. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00266-019-01603-2","DOI":"10.1007\/s00266-019-01603-2"},{"key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Kim JH, Hong SE. A comparative analysis between subpectoral versus prepectoral single stage direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Medicina (Kaunas). 2020;56(10):537. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/medicina56100537","DOI":"10.3390\/medicina56100537"},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Patel R, Somogyi RB. Comparing post-surgical outcomes of pre-pectoral versus dual-plane direct-to-implant breast reconstruction without increasing the use of acellular dermal matrix. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. 2022;75(3):1123-9. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.bjps.2021.11.017","DOI":"10.1016\/j.bjps.2021.11.017"},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Jones G, Yoo A, King V et al. Prepectoral immediate direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with anterior AlloDerm coverage. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140(6 supppl):31S-38S. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/PRS.0000000000004048","DOI":"10.1097\/PRS.0000000000004048"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Pittman TA, Abbate OA, Economides JM. The P1 method: prepectoral breast reconstruction to minimize the palpable implant edge and upper pole rippling. Ann Plast Surg. 2018;80(5):487-92. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SAP.0000000000001426","DOI":"10.1097\/SAP.0000000000001426"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Gubitosi A, Docimo G, Parmeggiani D et al. Acellular bovine pericardium dermal matrix in immediate breast reconstruction after skin sparing mastectomy. Int J Surg. 2014;12(suppl 1):S205-S208. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ijsu.2014.05.007","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijsu.2014.05.007"},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Eichler C, Efremova J, Brunnert K et al. A head to head comparison between SurgiMend\u00ae - fetal bovine acellular dermal matrix and Tutomesh\u00ae - a bovine pericardium collagen membrane in breast reconstruction in 45 cases. In Vivo. 2017;31(4):677-82. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.21873\/invivo.11112","DOI":"10.21873\/invivo.11112"},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Paprottka FJ, Krezdorn N, Sorg H et al. Evaluation of complication rates after breast surgery using acellular dermal matrix: median follow-up of three years. Plast Surg Int. 2017:1283735. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1155\/2017\/1283735","DOI":"10.1155\/2017\/1283735"},{"key":"ref12","unstructured":"Danske Multidisciplin\u00e6re Cancer Grupper. Kirurgisk behandling af brystkr\u00e6ft. Kliniske retningslinjer. Danske Multidisciplin\u00e6re Cancer Grupper, 2022. www.dmcg.dk\/kliniske-retningslinjer\/kliniske-retningslinjer-opdelt-paa-dmcg\/brystcancer\/kirurgisk-behandling-af-brystkraft\/ (Nov 2024)"},{"key":"ref13","unstructured":"Herly M. Local antibiotics for breast implants (BREAST-AB). https:\/\/clinicaltrials.gov\/ct2\/show\/NCT04731025 (Oct 2024)"},{"key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187-96. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2"},{"key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Snyderman RK. Reconstruction of the female breast following mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1980;66(1):158-9. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/00006534-198007000-00034","DOI":"10.1097\/00006534-198007000-00034"},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Borgognone A, Anniboletti T, De Vita F. Does Veritas\u00ae play a role in breast reconstruction? A case report. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2011;3:175-7. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2147\/BCTT.S27954","DOI":"10.2147\/BCTT.S27954"},{"key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Khan A, Tasoulis MK, Teoh V et al. Pre-pectoral one-stage breast reconstruction with anterior biological acellular dermal matrix coverage. Gland Surg. 2021;10(3):1002-9. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.21037\/gs-20-652","DOI":"10.21037\/gs-20-652"},{"key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Lauritzen E, Damsgaard TE. Use of indocyanine green angiography decreases the risk of complications in autologous- and implant-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. 2021;74(8):1703-17. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.bjps.2021.03.034","DOI":"10.1016\/j.bjps.2021.03.034"},{"key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Harless CA, Jacobson SR. Tailoring through technology: a retrospective review of a single surgeon's experience with implant-based breast reconstruction before and after implementation of laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography. Breast J. 2016;22(3):274-81. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/tbj.12576","DOI":"10.1111\/tbj.12576"}],"container-title":["Danish Medical Journal"],"original-title":[],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,6]],"date-time":"2025-08-06T11:49:22Z","timestamp":1754480962000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/ugeskriftet.dk\/dmj\/A08240522"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,1]]},"references-count":20,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.61409\/a08240522","relation":{},"ISSN":["2245-1919"],"issn-type":[{"type":"electronic","value":"2245-1919"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,1]]}}}