Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 1704–1706 | Cite as

The Use of Meshed Dermal Autograft in Breast Reconstruction

  • Nicola ZingarettiEmail author
  • Gianni Franco Guarneri
  • Fabrizio De Biasio
  • Mohamed A. Shoeib
  • Pier Camillo Parodi
Letter to the Editor


The advantages and disadvantages of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast reconstruction have been well documented. ADM is commonly used in breast reconstruction, but it adds cost to the procedure and has been associated with an increased risk of seroma, flap necrosis and infectious complications. A dermal autograft may be a useful alternative to matrices, and it has a lot of advantages: more biocompatible and more likely to be retained as a free graft, low cost, well tolerated, readily available and integrated. This report discusses a new surgical technique that uses an autologous dermis, which was harvested from the controlateral breast in patients having simultaneous breast reduction/mastopexy. Before the insertion, the autologous dermal matrix was meshed at a ratio of 3:1 to increase the graft surface area, to provide additional draining and to improve the engraftment of the autologous dermal matrix. Consequently, the resulting meshed graft allows for the cover of the inferior pole of a larger breast size implant and decreases the complication rate. In our clinic, this method was used on five women; there was one limited necrosis of the mastectomy flaps. The described technique is straightforward and reliable, it adds minimally to the operative time, and it eliminates costs and covers a bigger part of the prosthesis and promises good results.

No Level Assigned This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors


Breast reconstruction Acellular dermal matrices Breast implant Dermal autograft Meshed graft 



I sincerely thank Louise Murray for her review of the text.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationship, allilations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Almesberger D, Zingaretti N, Di Loreto C, Massarut S, Pasqualucci S, Parodi PC (2015) SeriTM: a surgical scaffold for breast reconstruction or for bacterial growth? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 68:870–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hudson DA, Adams KG, Adams S (2012) Autologous dermal graft in breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 68:253–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Biasio F, Zingaretti N, De Lorenzi F, Riccio M, Vaienti L, Parodi PC (2017) Reductive mastoplasties for symmetrization during heterologous mammary reconstruction. Aesth Plast Surg 41:773–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lynch MP, Chung MT, Tinker BD (2015) A comparison of dermal autograft and acellular dermal matrix in tissue expander breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 74:S214–S217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maguina P, Hoffman R, Szczerba S (2010) Autologous dermal graft in breast reconstruction and treatment of breast implant malposition. Plast Reconstr Surg 25:170e–171eCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Clinic of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Academic Hospital of Udine, Department of Medical ScienceUniversity of UdineUdineItaly
  2. 2.Department of Plastic SurgerySohag Faculty of MedicineSohâgEgypt

Personalised recommendations