Propensity-Matched, Longitudinal Outcomes Analysis of Complications and Cost: Comparing Abdominal Free Flaps and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction - 18/07/14
, Ari M. Wes, BA a, Jonas A. Nelson, MD a, Marten Basta, BA a, Jeffrey I. Rohrbach, MSN b, Liza C. Wu, MD, FACS a, Joseph M. Serletti, MD, FACS a, Stephen J. Kovach, MD aAbstract |
Background |
Choosing a breast reconstructive modality after mastectomy is an important step in the reconstructive process. The authors hypothesized that autologous tissue is associated with a greater success rate and cost efficacy over time, relative to implant reconstruction.
Study Design |
A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing free tissue (FF) transfer and expander implant (E/I) reconstruction between 2005 and 2011. Variables evaluated included comorbidities, surgical timing, complications, overall outcomes, unplanned reoperations, and costs. A propensity-matching technique was used to account for the nonrandomized selection of modality.
Results |
A total of 310 propensity-matched patients underwent 499 reconstructions. No statistically significant differences in preoperative variables were noted between propensity-matched cohorts. Operative characteristics were similar between FF and E/I reconstructions. The E/I reconstruction was associated with a significantly higher rate of reconstructive failure (5.6% vs 1.2%, p < 0.001). Expander implant reconstructions were associated with higher rates of seroma (p = 0.009) and lower rates of medical complications (p = 0.02), but overall significantly higher rates of unplanned operations (15.5% vs 5.8%, p = 0.002). The total cost of reconstruction did not differ significantly between groups ($23,120.49 ± $6,969.56 vs $22,739.91 ± $9,727.79, p = 0.060), but E/I reconstruction was associated with higher total cost for secondary procedures ($10,157.89 ± $8,741.77 vs $3,200.71 ± $4,780.64, p < 0.0001) and a higher cost of unplanned revisions over time (p < 0.05).
Conclusions |
Our matched outcomes analysis does demonstrate a higher overall, 2-year success rate using FF reconstruction and a significantly lower rate of unplanned surgical revisions and cost. Although autologous reconstruction is not ideal for every patient, these findings can be used to enhance preoperative discussions when choosing a reconstructive modality.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Abbreviations and Acronyms : BMI, E/I, FF, TRAM
Plan
| CME questions for this article available at jacscme.facs.org |
|
| Disclosure Information: Authors have nothing to disclose. Timothy J Eberlein, Editor-in-Chief, has nothing to disclose. |
Vol 219 - N° 2
P. 303-312 - août 2014 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
