4.6 Article

The Use of Human Acellular Dermal Matrix for Chest Wall Reconstruction

Journal

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 90, Issue 6, Pages 1799-1804

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.07.080

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Reconstruction of chest wall defects has evolved, but challenges remain. This is particularly true when defects are large or contamination is present. Although numerous materials are available for reconstruction, acellular dermal matrix has the advantage of becoming vascularized and incorporated autologously. By its resistance to infection and lack of adhesion formation, it is a promising although expensive alternative to synthetic materials in some circumstances. This report examines our experience with human acellular dermal matrix (HADM) in reconstruction of major chest wall and diaphragmatic defects. Methods. A retrospective study was conducted of all patients who underwent thoracic reconstruction using HADM between March 2007 and March 2010 at Harbor-University of California-Los Angeles Medical Center. Data acquisition included demographics, surgical indications, operative details, complications, and follow-up evaluation. Results. Ten patients were identified. Indications included thoracic tumor resection in 5, Clagett procedure modification for postpneumonectomy empyema in 2, resection of chest wall osteomyelitis in 2, and pneumonectomy for multiple aspergillomata in 1. Complications occurred in 4 patients and included respiratory failure, pneumonia, and wound seromas. All wounds healed without need to remove or revise the HADM, and sound chest wall closure was achieved in every case. Conclusions. HADM is an effective but expensive alternative to synthetic mesh in reconstruction of chest wall and diaphragmatic defects. It is particularly attractive for use under conditions of potential or overt contamination. (Ann Thorac Surg 2010;90:1799-804) (C) 2010 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available