Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Sep;132(3):534-541.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31829ae03e.

Use of autologous and microsurgical breast reconstruction by U.S. plastic surgeons

Anita R Kulkarni  1 , Erika Davis Sears, Dunya M Atisha, Amy K Alderman
Affiliations

Use of autologous and microsurgical breast reconstruction by U.S. plastic surgeons

Anita R Kulkarni et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Concern exists that plastic surgeons are performing fewer autologous and microsurgical breast reconstructions, despite superior long-term outcomes. The authors describe the proportion of U.S. plastic surgeons performing these procedures and evaluate motivating factors and perceived barriers.

Methods: A random national sample of American Society of Plastic Surgeons members was surveyed (n = 325; response rate, 76 percent). Surgeon and practice characteristics were assessed, and two multiple logistic regression models were created to evaluate factors associated with (1) high-volume autologous providers and (2) microsurgical providers. Qualitative assessments of motivating factors and barriers to microsurgery were also performed.

Results: Fewer than one-fifth of plastic surgeons perform autologous procedures for more than 50 percent of their breast cancer patients, and only one-quarter perform any microsurgical breast reconstruction. Independent predictors of a high-volume autologous practice include involvement with resident education (odds ratio, 2.57; 95 percent CI, 1.26 to 5.24) and a microsurgical fellowship (odds ratio, 2.09; 95 percent CI, 1.04 to 4.27). Predictors of microsurgical breast reconstruction include involvement with resident education (odds ratio, 6.8; 95 percent CI, 3.32 to 13.91), microsurgical fellowship (odds ratio, 2.4; 95 percent CI, 1.16 to 4.95), and high breast reconstruction volume (odds ratio, 6.68; 95 percent CI, 1.76 to 25.27). The primary motivator for microsurgery is superior outcomes, and the primary deterrents are time and reimbursement.

Conclusions: The proportion of U.S. plastic surgeons with a high-volume autologous or microsurgical breast reconstruction practice is low. Involvement with resident education appears to facilitate both, whereas time constraints and reimbursement are primary deterrents. Future efforts should focus on improving the feasibility and accessibility of all types of breast reconstruction.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Alderman AK, Storey AF, Nair NS, Chung KC. Financial impact of breast reconstruction on an academic surgical practice. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123:1408–1413
    1. Wilkins EG, Alderman AK. Breast reconstruction practices in North America: Current trends and future priorities. Semin Plast Surg. 2004;18:149–155
    1. Kruper L, Holt A, Xu XX, et al. Disparities in reconstruction rates after mastectomy: Patterns of care and factors associated with the use of breast reconstruction in Southern California. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2158–2165
    1. Yueh JH, Slavin SA, Adesiyun T, et al. Patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: A comparative evaluation of DIEP, TRAM, latissimus flap, and implant techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:1585–1595
    1. Alderman AK, Wilkins EG, Lowery JC, Kim M, Davis JA. Determinants of patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106:769–776

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources