Breast ReconstructionNCT03143335
Direct to Implant Breast Reconstruction Based Pre- or Retropectoral
A study testing Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction and Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction in people with Breast Reconstruction, run by Odense University Hospital at 3 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to examine different outcomes of breast reconstruction in women who are treated for breast cancer with skin sparing mastectomy and subsequently a primary implant based reconstruction by one of two different techniques with either a pre- or retropectoral placement of the implant. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Breast Reconstruction
- What is being tested?
- Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction and Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 70 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- 1 May 2017to 1 May 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Women over 18 years referred to the Department of plastic surgery, Odense University Hospital, Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle, Denmark or Telemark Hospital, Skien, Norway between January 2017 and July 2018, who are found eligible for immediate breast reconstruction.
Who cannot join
- Dementia that makes it impossible to obtain informed consent
- Non-Danish speaking patients from whom informed consent cannot be obtained by interpreter
- Tobacco users
- Women with known hypertension treated with more than one drug
- Women who had pre-surgical radiation therapy.
- Women planned to have postsurgical radiation therapy.
Show all 10Show fewer
- BMI above 32 or below 22
- However, the final decision relies on sufficient thickness of the skin flaps after mastectomy prior to immediate reconstruction.
- Invited patient will receive both oral and written participant information after which there will be as many days for reflection as the treatment guaranty for cancer allows.
- Patients considering participation will be invited for a second consultation where written informed consent will be obtained from all who accept the invitation. Randomization will be performed during surgery, prior to reconstruction. Patients who do not wish to participate will be reconstruction with the implant placed retropectoral.
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 2 countries.
3 sites in 2 countries
Denmark2 sites
Odense University Hospital
Odense, 5000
Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle
Vejle, 7100
About this study
Official title: Direct to Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock Based pre-or Retropectoral Breast Reconstruction
The purpose of this study is to examine different outcomes of breast reconstruction in women who are treated for breast cancer with skin sparing mastectomy and subsequently a primary implant based reconstruction by one of two different techniques with either a pre- or retropectoral placement of the implant.
The main objective of the study is to establish whether one of these techniques may result in a superior outcome and thus should be recommended as first choice treatment rather than the other.
Read the detailed description
Women diagnosed with breast cancer, large areas of ductal carcinoma in situ or a hereditary high risk of breast cancer are offered a mastectomy either as a therapeutic or a risk reducing intervention. Those, who are found eligible for an immediate breast reconstruction using an implant are reconstructed by either a skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) or a nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) using an extracellular matrix. The current technique is to place the implant in a retropectoral pocket in which the cranial part of the implant is covered by the major pectoral muscle, whereas the caudal part of the implant is covered and supported by an extracellular dermal matrix (ADM) as a hammock.
Recent focus on the functional outcome has, however, identified a new challenge - breast animation deformity (BAD), breast distortion or "jumping breast". The consequence of the condition is that women with aesthetic pleasant results, in rest, experience breast animation deformity during contraction of the major pectoral muscle. Evaluation of forty breast augmented women with a subpectoral positioning of the implant revealed that 77.5% had some kind of distortion during movement of the arm. In these healthy individuals, however, the condition is partly hidden by the glandular tissue and subcutaneous fatty tissue.
The condition is more severe in women with a reconstructed breast using a retropectorally placed implant, where the glandular tissue has been removed, leaving only the subcutaneous fatty tissue to cover the muscle and implant. The investigators know from experience and from reviewing unpublished clinical pictures and videos of thirty patients, who had an immediate breast reconstruction using the hammock technique, that the vast majority of patients have a pronounced degree of BAD.
Patients, who have a prepectoral placement of their implant, tend to have a lesser degree of BAD. The functional outcome of the prepectoral placement of the implant has previously not been compared to the retropectoral placement of the implant in women reconstructed by an implant and an ADM. A possible disadvantage of a prepectoral placement of the implant may be less soft-tissue coverage supplied by the pectoral muscle leading to higher risk of significant capsular formation. Less soft-tissue coverage may also result in a more visible implant border and rippling. Furthermore, the implant will not benefit from the abundant vascularity of the muscle and in theory perhaps not be as resistant to infections and implant loss as the subpectoral positioned implants.
The primary aim of this study is to compare the degree of BAD following a prepectoral to a retropectoral placement of the implant using the hammock for immediate breast reconstruction. For this purpose we have designed two separate trials:
Retrospective Follow-up trial: The investigators plan to invite a total of forty patients to compare breast animation deformity and shoulder and arm morbidity in a retrospective cohort of patients. Twenty patients, who have had a conventional immediate breast reconstruction with a retropectoral placement of the implant will be compared to twenty patients , who have had an immediate breast reconstruction with a prepectoral placement of the implant.
Randomized clinical trial: Investigators plan to collect, examine and compare data on the two surgical techniques in order to test superiority of the prepectoral implant based reconstruction in accordance with our hypothesis that it leads to lesser degree of BAD and better functional outcomes.
The trial is thus designed with two parallel study-arms as participants are allocated to reconstruction by either retro- or prepectoral placement of the implant in the ratio 1:1.
As the clinically most important parameter seems to be breast animation deformity this will serve as primary end-point. Functional changes in shoulder and arm function between the two surgical techniques is also a very important perimeter to investigate and will be analysed as secondary end-points.
In addition to the above data a number of other patient related outcomes will be collected as part of this trial.
Designed as a multicentre trial, participant enrollment and data Collection will be performed at academic Hospitals in Denmark and Norway.
A password protected Electronic database placed on a secure server will be established. This database will only be accessible to the primary investigator of the research Group who will be involved in the analysis of the data.
This study will provide a better knowledge of the expected outcome of immediate breast reconstruction, when it is performed by one of these two surgical techniques. The investigators expect that these results will help determine if the prepectoral implant placement may represent a better and gentler method for reconstruction of the breast with lower morbidity than the retropectoral implant placement. In all cases the results of this trial will enable us to provide our patients with better and more objective information, before they are subjected to immediate breast reconstruction.
- Conditions
- Breast Reconstruction
- Being tested
- Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction, Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction
- Keywords
- Breast; Reconstruction; BAD; Implant; ADM
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Retropectoral immediate breast reconstructionProcedure or surgery
Immediate reconstruction with the implant placed in a standard fashion, i.e. retropectoral in combination with an acellular dermal matrix.
Prepectoral immediate breast reconstructionProcedure or surgery
Immediate breast reconstruction with the implant placed prepectoral supported by acellular dermal matrix alone.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction | Active comparator | Participants are randomized to immediate breast reconstruction with the implant placed retropectoral. Receives: Procedure: Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction |
| Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction | Active comparator | Participants are randomized to direct to immediate breast reconstruction with the implant placed prepectoral using acellular dermal matrix for support. Receives: Procedure: Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Breast animation deformity
Breast animation deformity (BAD) is one of the more unpleasant cosmetic results that can be seen after breast reconstruction with a retropectoral placed implant. The degree of breast distortion will be evaluated by two experienced plastic surgeons and classified according to the published classification by Spear S. Because the degree of breast distortion will be the primary outcome measure of this randomised trial, the sample size will be based on assumptions regarding the grade of distortion between groups. For this purpose, the distortion will be divided into two groups: 1) Severe distortion containing degree 3 and 4 and 2) Moderate distortion containing degree 1 and 2. In bilateral cases the most severe side will be the one used for comparison
Measured: 12 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Shoulder function
Because one of the most important difference between the two surgical procedures is the involvement of the major pectoralis muscle, change in shoulder function is relevant to investigate. For evaluation investigators use the internationally validated Constant Shoulder Score (CSS). This system assess pain, function in everyday life, range of motion and strength and incorporates these parameters into one total score. It is the recommended scoring-system by the European Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. Each variable in the system is evaluated separately. For all participants scoring will be performed preoperatively as well as 3 and 12 months postoperatively. Shoulder function will be evaluated bilaterally at all stages. To avoid multiplicity-issues the primary end point has been defined as the difference in total score between the baseline evaluation preoperatively and the evaluation one year postoperatively.
Measured: 3 and 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 May 2017
- Study start1 May 2017
- Primary completion1 Apr 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion1 May 2020 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Breast ReconstructionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Odense University HospitalThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Odense University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Sygehus Lillebaelt, Sykehuset Telemark
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Diana Lydia Dyrberg, Odense University Hospital
- Investigators
- Jørn Bo JB Thomsen, MD, PhD, Study chair, Center Hospital Vejle, Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03143335
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- S-2016060
- Status last verified
- Aug 2019
- First submitted
- 1 May 2017
- Last updated
- 29 Aug 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Dyrberg DL, Gunnarsson GL, Bille C, Sorensen JA, Thomsen JB. Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral? Trials. 2020 Feb 10;21(1):160. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-4125-6.
PubMed 32041661
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Aug 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Direct to Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock Based pre-or Retropectoral Breast Reconstruction
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03143335
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- S-2016060
- Conditions
- Breast Reconstruction
- Keywords
- Breast; Reconstruction; BAD; Implant; ADM
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Odense University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Sygehus Lillebaelt, Sykehuset Telemark
- Study start
- 1 May 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Apr 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 May 2020 (estimated)
- First posted
- 8 May 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to examine different outcomes of breast reconstruction in women who are treated for breast cancer with skin sparing mastectomy and subsequently a primary implant based reconstruction by one of two different techniques with either a pre- or retropectoral placement of the implant.
The main objective of the study is to establish whether one of these techniques may result in a superior outcome and thus should be recommended as first choice treatment rather than the other.
Detailed description
Women diagnosed with breast cancer, large areas of ductal carcinoma in situ or a hereditary high risk of breast cancer are offered a mastectomy either as a therapeutic or a risk reducing intervention. Those, who are found eligible for an immediate breast reconstruction using an implant are reconstructed by either a skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) or a nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) using an extracellular matrix. The current technique is to place the implant in a retropectoral pocket in which the cranial part of the implant is covered by the major pectoral muscle, whereas the caudal part of the implant is covered and supported by an extracellular dermal matrix (ADM) as a hammock.
Recent focus on the functional outcome has, however, identified a new challenge - breast animation deformity (BAD), breast distortion or "jumping breast". The consequence of the condition is that women with aesthetic pleasant results, in rest, experience breast animation deformity during contraction of the major pectoral muscle. Evaluation of forty breast augmented women with a subpectoral positioning of the implant revealed that 77.5% had some kind of distortion during movement of the arm. In these healthy individuals, however, the condition is partly hidden by the glandular tissue and subcutaneous fatty tissue.
The condition is more severe in women with a reconstructed breast using a retropectorally placed implant, where the glandular tissue has been removed, leaving only the subcutaneous fatty tissue to cover the muscle and implant. The investigators know from experience and from reviewing unpublished clinical pictures and videos of thirty patients, who had an immediate breast reconstruction using the hammock technique, that the vast majority of patients have a pronounced degree of BAD.
Patients, who have a prepectoral placement of their implant, tend to have a lesser degree of BAD. The functional outcome of the prepectoral placement of the implant has previously not been compared to the retropectoral placement of the implant in women reconstructed by an implant and an ADM. A possible disadvantage of a prepectoral placement of the implant may be less soft-tissue coverage supplied by the pectoral muscle leading to higher risk of significant capsular formation. Less soft-tissue coverage may also result in a more visible implant border and rippling. Furthermore, the implant will not benefit from the abundant vascularity of the muscle and in theory perhaps not be as resistant to infections and implant loss as the subpectoral positioned implants.
The primary aim of this study is to compare the degree of BAD following a prepectoral to a retropectoral placement of the implant using the hammock for immediate breast reconstruction. For this purpose we have designed two separate trials:
Retrospective Follow-up trial: The investigators plan to invite a total of forty patients to compare breast animation deformity and shoulder and arm morbidity in a retrospective cohort of patients. Twenty patients, who have had a conventional immediate breast reconstruction with a retropectoral placement of the implant will be compared to twenty patients , who have had an immediate breast reconstruction with a prepectoral placement of the implant.
Randomized clinical trial: Investigators plan to collect, examine and compare data on the two surgical techniques in order to test superiority of the prepectoral implant based reconstruction in accordance with our hypothesis that it leads to lesser degree of BAD and better functional outcomes.
The trial is thus designed with two parallel study-arms as participants are allocated to reconstruction by either retro- or prepectoral placement of the implant in the ratio 1:1.
As the clinically most important parameter seems to be breast animation deformity this will serve as primary end-point. Functional changes in shoulder and arm function between the two surgical techniques is also a very important perimeter to investigate and will be analysed as secondary end-points.
In addition to the above data a number of other patient related outcomes will be collected as part of this trial.
Designed as a multicentre trial, participant enrollment and data Collection will be performed at academic Hospitals in Denmark and Norway.
A password protected Electronic database placed on a secure server will be established. This database will only be accessible to the primary investigator of the research Group who will be involved in the analysis of the data.
This study will provide a better knowledge of the expected outcome of immediate breast reconstruction, when it is performed by one of these two surgical techniques. The investigators expect that these results will help determine if the prepectoral implant placement may represent a better and gentler method for reconstruction of the breast with lower morbidity than the retropectoral implant placement. In all cases the results of this trial will enable us to provide our patients with better and more objective information, before they are subjected to immediate breast reconstruction.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction | Active comparator | Procedure: Retropectoral immediate breast reconstructionParticipants are randomized to immediate breast reconstruction with the implant placed retropectoral. |
| Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction | Active comparator | Procedure: Prepectoral immediate breast reconstructionParticipants are randomized to direct to immediate breast reconstruction with the implant placed prepectoral using acellular dermal matrix for support. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Women over 18 years referred to the Department of plastic surgery, Odense University Hospital, Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle, Denmark or Telemark Hospital, Skien, Norway between January 2017 and July 2018, who are found eligible for immediate breast reconstruction.
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Dementia that makes it impossible to obtain informed consent
- Non-Danish speaking patients from whom informed consent cannot be obtained by interpreter
- Tobacco users
- Women with known hypertension treated with more than one drug
- Women who had pre-surgical radiation therapy.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Retropectoral immediate breast reconstructionImmediate reconstruction with the implant placed in a standard fashion, i.e. retropectoral in combination with an acellular dermal matrix. | Procedure or surgery | Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction |
| Prepectoral immediate breast reconstructionImmediate breast reconstruction with the implant placed prepectoral supported by acellular dermal matrix alone. | Procedure or surgery | Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction |
Primary outcome
Breast animation deformity
Time frame: 12 months
Breast animation deformity (BAD) is one of the more unpleasant cosmetic results that can be seen after breast reconstruction with a retropectoral placed implant. The degree of breast distortion will be evaluated by two experienced plastic surgeons and classified according to the published classification by Spear S. Because the degree of breast distortion will be the primary outcome measure of this randomised trial, the sample size will be based on assumptions regarding the grade of distortion between groups. For this purpose, the distortion will be divided into two groups: 1) Severe distortion containing degree 3 and 4 and 2) Moderate distortion containing degree 1 and 2. In bilateral cases the most severe side will be the one used for comparison
1 secondary outcome
Shoulder function
Time frame: 3 and 12 months
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Aug 2019.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32041661Dyrberg DL, Gunnarsson GL, Bille C, Sorensen JA, Thomsen JB. Direct-to-Implant Extracellular Matrix Hammock-based Breast Reconstruction; Prepectoral or Subpectoral? Trials. 2020 Feb 10;21(1):160. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-4125-6.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Breast Reconstruction
Recruiting
ChatGPT & Surgeon Synergy: Redefining Breast Reconstruction Consultations for Enhanced Patient Engagement and Satisfaction
Breast Cancer, Cancer of the Breast
RecruitingObservational study
The Study is an Observational Post-market Follow-up Program to Evaluate Long Term (5 Years) Safety of Mentor Breast Implants in Chinese Population
Breast Augmentation, Mammaplasty
Active, not recruiting
A Study of the Safety and Effectiveness of the Mentor Larger Size MemoryGel Ultra High Profile Breast Implants in Subjects Who Are Undergoing Primary Breast Reconstruction or Revision Reconstruction
Breast Reconstruction, Revision Breast Reconstruction
Active, not recruiting
Memory Gel and Shape Combined Cohort
Primary Breast Augmentation, Primary Breast Reconstruction
Not yet recruiting
Impact of Intraoperative Neurotization on Sensory Recovery of the Nipple and Breast Skin in Patients Undergoing Nipple Sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Implant-Based Reconstruction: NERSENSE, Prospective Randomized Control Study
Breast Cancer
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Jørn Bo JB Thomsen, MD, PhD study chair
Center Hospital Vejle, Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark
3 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Retropectoral immediate breast reconstruction and Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction in people with Breast Reconstruction, run by Odense University Hospital at 3 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 10 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Aug 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites in Denmark, Norway. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Breast animation deformity (time frame: 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03143335, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Aug 2019.