AlloDerm Versus DermACELL in Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of All Head-to-Head Comparisons
Yousef Tanas, Gioacchino De Sario Velasquez, Julie Tanas, Grace Gasper, Shadi Tanas, Keyvon Rashidi, Sarya Swed, Murad KaradshehAbstract
Background
AlloDerm (LifeCell, Branchburg, NJ) and DermACELL (LifeNet Health, Virginia Beach, VA) are two commonly used acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery.
Objectives
This head-to-head meta-analysis aims to compare the clinical outcomes, including complication rates and BREAST-Q patient satisfaction, associated with AlloDerm and DermACELL.
Methods
PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies in April 2024 and again in April 2025. We included all studies with data comparing AlloDerm and DermACELL. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics. A random-effects model was applied in case of significant heterogeneity followed by sensitivity analysis.
Results
The search yielded 1006 studies, of which 14 were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 1872 patients (2940 breasts) were analyzed, with 1091 breasts receiving AlloDerm and 541 breasts receiving DermACELL. The analysis revealed that Alloderm was associated with a slightly higher incidence of seroma formation (RR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.14 to 1.95, p = 0.003) compared to DermACELL, which may be due to surgical technique rather than ADM. No significant differences were observed in the rates of of all other complications and BREAST-Q outcomes. Further, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of red breast syndrome after sensitivity analysis.
Conclusion
DermACELL demonstrated a slightly lower incidence of seroma formation compared to AlloDerm. Further randomized trials are needed to confirm these results and explore the long-term outcomes associated with both ADMs.