Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Lattice Medical | UNKNOWN |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study is a first in human, two-stage single arm non-comparative study of safety and performance.
The aim of the study is to asses the safety and the clinical performance of a new device : the MATTISSE tissu engineering chamber.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| MATTISSE TEC | Experimental | Patient included receive MATTISSE TEC |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MATTISSE TEC | Device | Tissue engineering chamber MATTISSE |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Safety objective: To assess the 6 months surgical complications rate of MATTISSE® TEC implant-based immediate breast reconstruction. Adverse events will be recorded. | Minor complications include:
Major complications include:
| 6 months post-surgery |
| Performance objective: To assess the efficacy at 6 months post-operation of breast reconstruction using MATTISSE® breast implants in patients undergoing breast reconstitution after total mastectomy surgery for cancer. | Success is defined as:
Failure is defined as:
| 6 months post-surgery |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Evolution of tissue expansion (flap enlargement) from implantation up to 36 months post operation. | Tissue expansion will be assessed using MRI at discharge (after surgery), 12, 24 and 36 months post operative. All MRI imaging will be assessed by and independent expert radiologist. | Surgery visit, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-intervention |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Criteria related to pathology:
Female patient over 18 Years old
Patient who required autologous breast reconstruction:
For patient with active cancer: Patient with early-stage cancer (stage 0, I or II, with tumor size < 50mm, without lymph-node involvement) needing oncological management that does not required radiotherapy after surgery on the breast area or on the flap donor site
Patient who required Nipple sparing (NSM) or Skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) with a unique surgical approach (same for mastectomy and implant) insertion; or implant removal for patient undergoing autologous conversion, or expender removal for patient undergoing differed reconstruction.
Autologous reconstruction using Lateral Intercostal Perforator (LICAP) flap or an intercostal thoracic artery perforation flap (LTAP) if oncological conditions do not allow for LICAP harvesting.
Patient medically fit for surgery without significant comorbidities
Breast cup-size less than D
Body mass index >20 kg/m2 or patient for whom sufficient flap volume is expected according to surgeon's assessment
Adequate hematopoietic functions
Criteria related to population:
Non-inclusion Criteria:
Pathology related criteria:
Population related criteria
Medical device related criteria
EXCLUSION CRITERIA
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pierre GUERRESCHI, Pr | Contact | 03.20.44.56.59 | clinic@lattice-medical.com |
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHU de Strasbourg | Recruiting | Strasbourg | France | 67091 | France |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22094739 | Background | Findlay MW, Dolderer JH, Trost N, Craft RO, Cao Y, Cooper-White J, Stevens G, Morrison WA. Tissue-engineered breast reconstruction: bridging the gap toward large-volume tissue engineering in humans. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Dec;128(6):1206-1215. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318230c5b2. | |
| 23394225 | Background | Matsuda K, Falkenberg KJ, Woods AA, Choi YS, Morrison WA, Dilley RJ. Adipose-derived stem cells promote angiogenesis and tissue formation for in vivo tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A. 2013 Jun;19(11-12):1327-35. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2012.0391. Epub 2013 Mar 28. |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Related Info | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Evolution of breast softness from inclusion to 36 months |
| Surgery visit, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-intervention |
| Evolution of MATTISSE® TEC resorption until 36 months follow up: the resorption is active between 6 and 12 months after surgery. | MATTISSE® TEC resorption will be observed quantitatively on MRI achieved at 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months associated with the touch of the surgeon and patients feeling. The TEC resorption will be classified as:
| Surgery visit, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-intervention |
| The volume of the reconstructed breast compared to the volume of the contralateral one at 12, 24 and 36 months | At 12, 24 and 36 months, we will assess during physical examinations, the volume of the reconstructed breast and the volume of the contralateral one. | 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post surgery |
| Aesthetic breast appearance before and after surgery using photo | Aesthetic breast appearance will be assessed before surgery, 6 at 12, 24 and 36 months post-surgery using standardized photographs. The assessment will be done by the surgeon and 2 independent external specialists who validated standardized photographs. The following scoring points will be used:
| 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post surgery |
| The maintain of breast (i.e., flap) volume stability at 12, 24 and 36 months compared to that at 6 months | Flap volume at 12, 24 and 36 months is compared at that assessed at 6 months using MRI. All MRI imaging will be assessed by and independent expert radiologist. | 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post surgery |
| The impact of the flap transfer on the donor site assessed at surgery, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36months post-surgery | Impact of the flap transfer on the donor site will be assessed at surgery, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-surgery using different parameters:
| 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post surgery |
| Pain (VAS) | Pain score will be assessed at inclusion, discharge, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 month using a 10 Visual Analogue Scale [VAS, 0 (no pain) and 10 (worst possible pain)] | 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post surgery |
| The quality of life and the satisfaction of patients | Quality of life and patients' satisfaction will be done through the BREAST-Q© questionnaire (module of reconstruction pre and post-surgery version) at inclusion and at 3, 6 and 12 months post operative. The quality of life is evaluated through 2 scales (psychological well-being and physical well-being: breast). The satisfaction is evaluated with 1 scale : (satisfaction with breast). | 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post surgery |
| Surgeon satisfaction regarding the use of MATTISSE® TEC and implantation procedure. | - Surgeons' satisfaction regarding the use of MATTISSE® TEC and implantation procedure will be assessed on: Global satisfaction of the surgeon (5 points Likert scale)
| Visit 2, surgery |
| Evolution of biological parameters up to 6 months after surgery | Complete blood counts evolution will be assessed at inclusion, at discharge, and at 3 and 6 months post-implantation, by measuring Hemoglobin , leukocytes Lymphocyte rate Neutrophil rate and Thrombocytes Units:
| Inclusion, Discharge, 3, 6 months post-intervention |
| Evolution of biological parameters up to 6 months after surgery | C-reactive protein evolution will be assessed at inclusion, at discharge, and at 3 and 6 months post-implantation, by measuring CRP Unit: - CRP : nmoL/L | Inclusion, Discharge, 3, 6 months post-intervention |
| Evolution of biological parameters up to 6 months after surgery | Total protein evolution will be assessed at inclusion, at discharge, and at 3 and 6 months post-implantation, by total protein assay Unit: Total protein: Normal or Not normal | Inclusion, Discharge, 3, 6 months post-intervention |
| Evolution of biological parameters up to 6 months after surgery | Protein electrophoresis will be assessed at inclusion, at discharge, and at 3 and 6 months post-implantation, by performing protein electrophoresis. Unit : Protein electrophoresis: Normal or Not normal | Inclusion, Discharge, 3, 6 months post-intervention |
| Safety up to 36 months post operation | Safety up to 36 months, will be assessed by measuring the complication rate after breast reconstruction using MATTISSE® TEC. Adverse events up to 36 months post operation will be recorded. | Surgery visit, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-intervention |
| Hospital of Lille | Recruiting | Lille | Nord | 59000 | France |
|
| Institute of Clinical Oncology | Recruiting | Tbilisi | 0159 | Georgia |
|
| 31548545 | Result | Harbeck N, Penault-Llorca F, Cortes J, Gnant M, Houssami N, Poortmans P, Ruddy K, Tsang J, Cardoso F. Breast cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019 Sep 23;5(1):66. doi: 10.1038/s41572-019-0111-2. |
| 26835456 | Result | Schmauss D, Machens HG, Harder Y. Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy. Front Surg. 2016 Jan 19;2:71. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2015.00071. eCollection 2015. |
| 11391187 | Result | Tzafetta K, Ahmed O, Bahia H, Jerwood D, Ramakrishnan V. Evaluation of the factors related to postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001 Jun;107(7):1694-701. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200106000-00009. |
| 18626347 | Result | Vega S, Smartt JM Jr, Jiang S, Selber JC, Brooks CJM, Herrera HR, Serletti JM. 500 Consecutive patients with free TRAM flap breast reconstruction: a single surgeon's experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Aug;122(2):329-339. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31817f45cb. |
| 23542837 | Result | Duggal CS, Grudziak J, Metcalfe DB, Carlson GW, Losken A. The effects of breast size in unilateral postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2013 May;70(5):506-12. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318263f1f8. |
| 19952638 | Result | Noone RB. Thirty-five years of breast reconstruction: eleven lessons to share. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Dec;124(6):1820-1827. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181bf821a. No abstract available. |
| 21285756 | Result | Salzberg CA, Ashikari AY, Koch RM, Chabner-Thompson E. An 8-year experience of direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction using human acellular dermal matrix (AlloDerm). Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Feb;127(2):514-524. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318200a961. |
| 27211566 | Result | Morrison WA, Marre D, Grinsell D, Batty A, Trost N, O'Connor AJ. Creation of a Large Adipose Tissue Construct in Humans Using a Tissue-engineering Chamber: A Step Forward in the Clinical Application of Soft Tissue Engineering. EBioMedicine. 2016 Apr;6:238-245. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.03.032. Epub 2016 Mar 23. |
| 22395342 | Result | Petit JY, Rietjens M, Lohsiriwat V, Rey P, Garusi C, De Lorenzi F, Martella S, Manconi A, Barbieri B, Clough KB. Update on breast reconstruction techniques and indications. World J Surg. 2012 Jul;36(7):1486-97. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1486-3. |
| 16980842 | Result | Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon's 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: part I. A prospective analysis of early complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006 Sep 15;118(4):825-831. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000232362.82402.e8. |
| 23761525 | Result | Martindale V, Menache A. The PIP scandal: an analysis of the process of quality control that failed to safeguard women from the health risks. J R Soc Med. 2013 May;106(5):173-7. doi: 10.1177/0141076813480994. No abstract available. |
| 11103081 | Result | Mian R, Morrison WA, Hurley JV, Penington AJ, Romeo R, Tanaka Y, Knight KR. Formation of new tissue from an arteriovenous loop in the absence of added extracellular matrix. Tissue Eng. 2000 Dec;6(6):595-603. doi: 10.1089/10763270050199541. |
| 10657450 | Result | Tanaka Y, Tsutsumi A, Crowe DM, Tajima S, Morrison WA. Generation of an autologous tissue (matrix) flap by combining an arteriovenous shunt loop with artificial skin in rats: preliminary report. Br J Plast Surg. 2000 Jan;53(1):51-7. doi: 10.1054/bjps.1999.3186. |
| 12621190 | Result | Hofer SO, Knight KM, Cooper-White JJ, O'Connor AJ, Perera JM, Romeo-Meeuw R, Penington AJ, Knight KR, Morrison WA, Messina A. Increasing the volume of vascularized tissue formation in engineered constructs: an experimental study in rats. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Mar;111(3):1186-92; discussion 1193-4. doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000046034.02158.EB. |
| 14707645 | Result | Cronin KJ, Messina A, Knight KR, Cooper-White JJ, Stevens GW, Penington AJ, Morrison WA. New murine model of spontaneous autologous tissue engineering, combining an arteriovenous pedicle with matrix materials. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004 Jan;113(1):260-9. doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000095942.71618.9D. |
| 19935290 | Result | Findlay MW, Messina A, Thompson EW, Morrison WA. Long-term persistence of tissue-engineered adipose flaps in a murine model to 1 year: an update. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Oct;124(4):1077-1084. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181b59ff6. |
| 32678237 | Result | Faglin P, Gradwohl M, Depoortere C, Germain N, Drucbert AS, Brun S, Nahon C, Dekiouk S, Rech A, Azaroual N, Maboudou P, Payen J, Danze PM, Guerreschi P, Marchetti P. Rationale for the design of 3D-printable bioresorbable tissue-engineering chambers to promote the growth of adipose tissue. Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 16;10(1):11779. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-68776-8. |
| 33672918 | Result | Gradwohl M, Chai F, Payen J, Guerreschi P, Marchetti P, Blanchemain N. Effects of Two Melt Extrusion Based Additive Manufacturing Technologies and Common Sterilization Methods on the Properties of a Medical Grade PLGA Copolymer. Polymers (Basel). 2021 Feb 14;13(4):572. doi: 10.3390/polym13040572. |