Comparison of Complications Following Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using Triple Antibiotic Solution versus Low Concentration Chlorhexidine Gluconate Solution

HTML  XML Download Download as PDF (Size: 339KB)  PP. 74-85  
DOI: 10.4236/mps.2019.94010    1,241 Downloads   3,297 Views  Citations

ABSTRACT

Background: Prevention of infection and capsular contracture remains a primary goal of implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). Previous studies have demonstrated improved outcomes with the use of triple-antibiotic solution (TAS) for breast pocket irrigation, but ready-to-use products have recently gained popularity. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes following IBBR between TAS and low-concentration chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) solutions. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of 690 consecutive patients undergoing IBBR from 2008-2017. The TAS (n = 346) irrigation solution was composed of 1 g cefazolin, 80 mg gentamicin and 50,000 U bacitracin diluted in 500 mL of normal saline; the CHG (n = 344) irrigation solution was the commercially-available product Irrisept (0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate in sterile water, Irrimax Corporation, Lawrenceville, GA). Comparisons were made between demographic and clinical variables. Complications were recorded and statistical analysis, including multivariate regression analysis, was performed. Results: The TAS group underwent significantly more skin-sparing mastectomies, adjuvant chemotherapy/radiation and less direct-to-implant reconstruction than the CHG group. The CHG group experienced a significantly lower incidence of total complications (22.4% vs. 31.8%, p = 0.006), minor complications (8.7% vs. 16.5%, p = 0.003), infection (6.4% vs. 12.7%, p = 0.006) and seroma (2.6% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.011). There was a significantly increased rate of delayed wound healing in the CHG group. Multivariate analysis showed that the use of CHG solution significantly decreased the odds of any complication by 1.6-fold (OR 0.637, 95% CI 0.414 - 0.977) and the odds of infection by 2.4-fold (OR 0.420, 95% CI 0.218 - 0.809). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of capsular contracture or other complications. Conclusions: The use of CHG as a pocket irrigant in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is a reasonable alternative to other solutions, in efforts to minimize prosthetic based complications.

Share and Cite:

Merceron, T. , Betarbet, U. , Hart, A. , Baker, N. , Carlson, G. and Losken, A. (2019) Comparison of Complications Following Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using Triple Antibiotic Solution versus Low Concentration Chlorhexidine Gluconate Solution. Modern Plastic Surgery, 9, 74-85. doi: 10.4236/mps.2019.94010.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.