brochure: Braxon® vs synthetic meshes - 5 GOOD REASONS TO CHOOSE COLLAGEN_english_2019
5 GOOD REASONS TO CHOOSE COLLAGEN
Collagen prevents from periprosthetic fibrotic tissue formation. After 4 years of follow-up no cases of capsular contractures have been recorded. 1
Collagen is integrated and becomes tissue of the patient without affecting the results of ultrasound post-operative controls. 5,6
Studies on large cohorts demonstrated 0% of erythema or red breast syndrome. 8
Collagen is recognized as “self” material and it does not amplify the inflammatory response, therefore the serum production is reduced. 6
Collagen membrane does not irritate the subcutaneous tissue; it is integrated in a new layer of tissue which prevents from implant extrusion. 1,6,11
Studies on rats reported the formation of a “stiff and rigid cage” while human studies described 11.9% of capsular contracture. 2,3,4
Formation of granulomas which can appear as subcutaneous nodules that may influence local recurrence management. 7
In medical literature erythema formation is reported up to 45.8%. 9
Synthetic material amplifies the inflammatory process causing seroma formation. 10
The use of synthetic meshes leads the surgeon to face new complications. 12
1.Berna G, Cawthorn SJ. Long term follow-up on prepectoral ADM-assisted breast
reconstruction: evidences after 4 years Eur J Plast Surg. 2017; 40: 255.
2.Bergmann PA, Becker B, Mauss KL, et al. Titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TiLoop Bra®)
- an effective prevention for capsular contracture? Eur J Plast Surg. 2014;37(6):339–346.
3.Grow JN, Butterworth J, Petty P. Alternatives to Acellular Dermal Matrix: Utilization of a Gore
DualMesh Sling as a Cost-Conscious Adjunct for Breast Reconstruction. Eplasty. 2017; 17:e4
4.Meyer Ganz O, Tobalem M, Perneger T, Lam T, Modarressi A, Elias B, Pittet B. Risks and
benefits of using an absorbable mesh in one-stage immediate breast reconstruction:
a comparative study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Mar; 135(3):498e-507e.
5.Iqbal FM, Bhatnagar A, Vidya R. Host Integration of an Acellular Dermal Matrix: Braxon Mesh
in Breast Reconstruction. Clin Breast Cancer. 2016 Dec;16(6):e209-e211.
6.Onesti MG, Maruccia M, Di Taranto G, Albano A, Soda G, Ballesio L, Scuderi N. Clinical,
histological, and ultrasound follow-up of breast reconstruction with one - stage muscle -
sparing “wrap” technique: A single-center experience. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg.
7.Riggio E, Chifu C, Martelli G, Ferraris C. Can titanium mesh influence local recurrence
management after implant-based breast reconstruction? Springerplus. 2015 Sep 4;4:482.
8.Vidya R, Masià J, Cawthorn S, Berna G, Bozza F, Gardetto A, Kołacińska A, Dell’Antonia F,
Tiengo C, Bassetto F, Caputo GG, Governa M. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the prepectoral
breast reconstruction with Braxon dermal matrix: First multicenter European report on 100
cases. Breast J. 2017 May 8.
9.Tsuji W, Yotsumoto F. Pros and cons of immediate Vicryl mesh insertion after lumpectomy.
Asian J Surg. 2017 Aug 18.
10.Dieterich M, Paepke S, Zwiefel K, Dieterich H, Blohmer J, Faridi A, Klein E, Gerber B, Nestle-
Kraemling C. Implant-based breast reconstruction using a titanium-coated polypropylene
mesh (TiLOOP Bra): a multicenter study of 231 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg.
11.Berna G, Cawthorn SJ, Papaccio G, et al. Evaluation of a novel breast reconstruction
technique using the Braxon® acellular dermal matrix: a new muscle-sparing breast
reconstruction. ANZ J Surg. 2014 September 29. doi: 10.1111/ans.12849.
12.De Riggi MA, Rocco N, Gherardini G, Esposito E, D’Aiuto M. Management of Implant Exposure
in One-Stage Breast Reconstruction Using Titanium-Coated Polypropylene Mesh:
Sub-Mammary Intercostal Perforator Flap. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016 Dec;40(6):896-900.