Is Single-Stage Prosthetic Reconstruction Cost Effective? A Cost-Utility Analysis for the Use of Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Relative to Expander-Implant Reconstruction in Postmastectomy Patients
- PMID: 27556599
- DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002428
Is Single-Stage Prosthetic Reconstruction Cost Effective? A Cost-Utility Analysis for the Use of Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Relative to Expander-Implant Reconstruction in Postmastectomy Patients
Abstract
Background: Prosthetic breast reconstruction is most commonly performed using the two-stage (expander-implant) technique. However, with the advent of skin-sparing mastectomy and the use of acellular dermal matrices, one-stage prosthetic reconstruction has become more feasible. Prior studies have suggested that one-stage reconstruction has economic advantages relative to two-stage reconstruction despite a higher revision rate. This is the first cost-utility analysis to compare the cost and quality of life of both procedures to guide patient care.
Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to include studies directly comparing matched patient cohorts undergoing single-stage or staged prosthetic reconstruction. Six studies were selected examining 791 direct-to-implant reconstructions and 1142 expander-implant reconstructions. Costs were derived adopting both patient and third-party payer perspectives. Utilities were derived by surveying an expert panel. Probabilities of clinically relevant complications were combined with cost and utility estimates to fit into a decision tree analysis.
Results: The overall complication rate was 35 percent for single-stage reconstruction and 34 percent for expander-implant reconstruction. The authors' baseline analysis using Medicare reimbursement revealed a cost decrease of $525.25 and a clinical benefit of 0.89 quality-adjusted life-year when performing single-stage reconstructions, yielding a negative incremental cost-utility ratio. When using national billing, the incremental cost-utility further decreased, indicating that direct-to-implant breast reconstruction was the dominant strategy. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the authors' conclusions.
Conclusions: Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction is the dominant strategy when used appropriately. Surgeons are encouraged to consider single-stage reconstruction when feasible in properly selected patients.
Comment in
-
Is Single-Stage Prosthetic Reconstruction Cost Effective? A Cost-Utility Analysis for the Use of Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Relative to Expander-Implant Reconstruction in Postmastectomy Patients.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 May;139(5):1204e-1205e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003300. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017. PMID: 28085717 No abstract available.
References
-
- American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Report of the 2013 plastic surgery statistics. Available at: http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2013-s.... Accessed March 8, 2015.
-
- 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;127:514524.
-
- Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, Medford-Davis L, Hertl C, Austen WG Jr. Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: Indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:11701178.
-
- Cassileth L, Kohanzadeh S, Amersi F. One-stage immediate breast reconstruction with implants: A new option for immediate reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;69:134138.
-
- Salgarello M, Seccia A, Eugenio F. Immediate breast reconstruction with anatomical permanent expandable implants after skin-sparing mastectomy: Aesthetic and technical refinements. Ann Plast Surg. 2004;52:358364; discussion 365.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical