Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A cost-effectiveness analysis of DIEP vs free MS-TRAM flap for microsurgical breast reconstruction.
Tan, Marcus G; Isaranuwatchai, Wanrudee; DeLyzer, Tanya; Butler, Kate; Hofer, Stefan O P; O'Neill, Anne C; Zhong, Toni.
Afiliação
  • Tan MG; Department of Undergraduate Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Isaranuwatchai W; Centre for Excellence in Economic Analysis Research, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • DeLyzer T; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Butler K; Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Hofer SOP; Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • O'Neill AC; Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Zhong T; Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
J Surg Oncol ; 119(3): 388-396, 2019 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30562406
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap may be associated with less long-term donor-site morbidity compared with free muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap (MS-TRAM) flap. However, DIEP flaps may have longer operative time and higher rates of acute postoperative complications. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) that compared the long-term costs and patient-reported outcomes between the two flaps. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of women who received free MS-TRAM or DIEP flap reconstruction between January 2008 and December 2012, with a minimum of 2-year follow-up, were recruited. Cost data of the primary reconstruction and any subsequent hospitalization due to complications from the reconstruction within 2 years were obtained. Each patient received a BREAST-Q questionnaire at 2 years post-reconstruction. RESULTS: In total, 227 patients (180 DIEP, 47 free MS-TRAM) were included. DIEP patients had significantly fewer abdominal hernia (P = 0.04). The adjusted-incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found that DIEP flap was more cost-effective to free MS-TRAM flap in the domains of "Physical Well-Being of the Abdomen" and "Satisfaction with Outcome." CONCLUSIONS: DIEP flap is the more cost-effective method of autologous breast reconstruction in the long-term compared with free MS-TRAM flap with respect to patient-reported abdominal well-being and overall satisfaction with the outcome.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Complicações Pós-Operatórias / Neoplasias da Mama / Mamoplastia / Análise Custo-Benefício / Reto do Abdome / Artérias Epigástricas / Retalhos de Tecido Biológico Tipo de estudo: Health_economic_evaluation / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Surg Oncol Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Canadá

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Complicações Pós-Operatórias / Neoplasias da Mama / Mamoplastia / Análise Custo-Benefício / Reto do Abdome / Artérias Epigástricas / Retalhos de Tecido Biológico Tipo de estudo: Health_economic_evaluation / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Surg Oncol Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Canadá