Systematic review evaluates acellular dermal matrix in breast reconstruction, highlighting selective use and implications for practice.
Introduction: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is commonly used as an adjunct in implant-based breast reconstruction following mastectomy. However, its routine application remains controversial, with conflicting evidence regarding clinical benefit, safety, and cost-effectiveness. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted of clinical studies published between January 2010 and November 2025 evaluating ADM-assisted implant-based breast reconstruction. Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, non-randomised comparative studies, and case series involving ≥10 patients. Outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, aesthetic outcomes, patient-reported satisfaction, and economic considerations. Searches were performed using PubMed, Scopus/Elsevier, and Google Scholar, with study selection conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Results: Across included studies, ADM use did not consistently demonstrate improvements in short-term aesthetic outcomes, patient-reported quality of life, or early postoperative complication rates compared with conventional techniques. In contrast, long-term data from large prospective cohorts suggested a lower incidence of capsular contracture associated with ADM use. In contemporary reconstructive practice, particularly prepectoral implant placement, ADM was associated with acceptable short-term safety in appropriately selected patients. Patient-related factors, including obesity, smoking, and diabetes, were consistently associated with increased complication risk. Although ADM is associated with higher upfront costs, evidence regarding long-term cost-effectiveness remains limited. Conclusions: ADM should be considered a selective adjunct rather than a routine component of implant-based breast reconstruction. Its primary clinical value appears to relate to long-term modulation of fibrosis rather than short-term outcomes. Individualised patient selection and surgical strategy are essential, and further high-quality prospective and economic studies are needed to better define their role.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fitri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: