Early Experience with Synthetic Monofilament Polydioxanone Mesh in Primary Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Matched Analysis

Abstract Polydioxanone (PDS) mesh is an emerging technology for prosthetic breast reconstruction. However, there is a paucity of data on its safety and efficacy in primary breast reconstruction. Demographic and outcomes measures from consecutive, immediate prosthetic breast reconstructions using PDS or acellular dermal matrix (ADM) from a single surgeon were evaluated on a per-breast basis between 2013 and 2023. Propensity matching based on demographic variables was conducted. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of the mesh. A total of 796 breast reconstructions were identified, and propensity matching yielded 192 ADM and 48 PDS mesh reconstructions. There was no significant difference with respect to age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, smoking history, diabetes, mastectomy indication, radiation, chemotherapy, expander plane, and mastectomy type between propensity matched cohorts. Body mass index (BMI) varied by 2.1 points (ADM: 25.8 vs. PDS: 23.7, p = 0.01). Mean follow-up time was 13.5 ± 2.7 months. The propensity-matched PDS mesh cohort had lower rates of any complication (ADM: 23.9% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, p = 0.003), seroma (ADM: 11.4% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p = 0.01), expander exposure (ADM: 12.5% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p = 0.01), complication-associated expander removal (ADM: 9.9% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (ADM: 14.0% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, p = 0.05). PDS mesh, compared to ADM, was independently associated with decreased risk of any complication (OR: 0.443, p = 0.02), seroma (odds ratio [OR]: 0.456, p = 0.03), expander exposure (OR: 0.277, p = 0.03), complication-associated expander removal (OR: 0.211, p = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (OR: 0.12, p = 0.04). PDS mesh is an alternative to ADM in primary prosthetic breast reconstruction. Rates of complication—including infection, seroma, and explantation—suggest an acceptable safety profile relative to ADM.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Archives of Plastic Surgery
Published
2026-06-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2850-0163
Primary Topic
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Early Experience with Synthetic Monofilament Polydioxanone Mesh in Primary Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Matched Analysis

Puja Jagasia, John YS Kim, Reena Sulkar, Anna Whitney
Archives of Plastic Surgery
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
article

Early Experience with Synthetic Monofilament Polydioxanone Mesh in Primary Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Matched Analysis

Puja Jagasia, John YS Kim, Reena Sulkar, Anna Whitney
article en

Abstract

Abstract Polydioxanone (PDS) mesh is an emerging technology for prosthetic breast reconstruction. However, there is a paucity of data on its safety and efficacy in primary breast reconstruction. Demographic and outcomes measures from consecutive, immediate prosthetic breast reconstructions using PDS or acellular dermal matrix (ADM) from a single surgeon were evaluated on a per-breast basis between 2013 and 2023. Propensity matching based on demographic variables was conducted. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of the mesh. A total of 796 breast reconstructions were identified, and propensity matching yielded 192 ADM and 48 PDS mesh reconstructions. There was no significant difference with respect to age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, smoking history, diabetes, mastectomy indication, radiation, chemotherapy, expander plane, and mastectomy type between propensity matched cohorts. Body mass index (BMI) varied by 2.1 points (ADM: 25.8 vs. PDS: 23.7, p = 0.01). Mean follow-up time was 13.5 ± 2.7 months. The propensity-matched PDS mesh cohort had lower rates of any complication (ADM: 23.9% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, p = 0.003), seroma (ADM: 11.4% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p = 0.01), expander exposure (ADM: 12.5% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p = 0.01), complication-associated expander removal (ADM: 9.9% vs. PDS mesh: 0%, p = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (ADM: 14.0% vs. PDS mesh: 4.2%, p = 0.05). PDS mesh, compared to ADM, was independently associated with decreased risk of any complication (OR: 0.443, p = 0.02), seroma (odds ratio [OR]: 0.456, p = 0.03), expander exposure (OR: 0.277, p = 0.03), complication-associated expander removal (OR: 0.211, p = 0.02), and mastectomy flap necrosis (OR: 0.12, p = 0.04). PDS mesh is an alternative to ADM in primary prosthetic breast reconstruction. Rates of complication—including infection, seroma, and explantation—suggest an acceptable safety profile relative to ADM.

Archives of Plastic Surgery
Northwestern Memorial Hospital (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.