Autologous Breast Reconstruction Trends in the United States: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database
- PMID: 33443887
- DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002664
Autologous Breast Reconstruction Trends in the United States: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database
Abstract
Background: Autologous tissue is the criterion standard in breast reconstruction, but traditionally has been used as a secondary option after implant-based options because of reduced reimbursement relative to effort and required additional technical skill. We intended to evaluate the overall frequency and trends of autologous breast reconstruction (ABR), the trends of ABR in teaching versus nonteaching hospitals and the trends of ABR in different hospital regions in the United States.
Methods: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, we examined the clinical data of patients who underwent immediate or delayed ABR from 2009 to 2016 in the United States.
Results: A total of 146,185 patients underwent ABR during this period. The overall rate of ABR increased 112%, from 26.6% to 56.5%. The majority of ABR were delayed reconstructions (62.3%), which increased gradually from 54.9% to 80% during the study period. The overall frequency of flaps included the deep inferior epigastric perforator (32.1%), latissimus dorsi myocutaneous (28.4%), free transvers rectus abdominus myocutaneous (15.9%), pedicled transvers rectus abdominus myocutaneous flap (14.5%), gluteal artery perforator (0.6%), superficial inferior epigastric artery (0.6%), and unspecified-ABR (7.2%). Most ABRs were performed in teaching hospitals (78.6%) versus nonteaching hospitals (21.4%). The teaching hospitals' ABR rate increased from 70.5% to 88.7%. The greatest proportion of ABRs were performed in the south (39.6%) followed by northeast (23.0%), midwest (18.9%), and west (18.5%).
Conclusions: The deep inferior epigastric perforator flap has become the predominant ABR method in the United States. In addition to more delayed reconstructions being performed in recent years, ABR rates are increasing overall and shifting from pedicled flaps to free flaps.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared.
Similar articles
-
Perioperative outcomes of autologous breast reconstruction surgery in teaching versus nonteaching hospitals.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014 Oct;134(4):514e-520e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000505. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014. PMID: 25357045
-
Updated Trends and Outcomes in Autologous Breast Reconstruction in the United States, 2016-2019.Ann Plast Surg. 2024 Apr 1;92(4):e1-e13. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003764. Epub 2024 Jan 12. Ann Plast Surg. 2024. PMID: 38320006
-
Evolving Trends in Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Is the Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator Flap Taking Over?Ann Plast Surg. 2016 May;76(5):489-93. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000339. Ann Plast Surg. 2016. PMID: 25180959
-
Is Unipedicled Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flap Obsolete Owing to Superiority of DIEP Flap?Ann Plast Surg. 2018 Jun;80(6S Suppl 6):S418-S420. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001319. Ann Plast Surg. 2018. PMID: 29369109 Review.
-
A review of different breast reconstruction methods.Am J Transl Res. 2023 Jun 15;15(6):3846-3855. eCollection 2023. Am J Transl Res. 2023. PMID: 37434844 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Satisfaction with Breasts following Autologous Reconstruction: Assessing Associated Factors and the Impact of Revisions.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2025 Feb 1;155(2):235-244. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000011571. Epub 2024 Jun 10. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2025. PMID: 38857436
-
Microsurgical breast reconstruction in the United States: a narrative review of the current state.Gland Surg. 2024 Aug 31;13(8):1535-1551. doi: 10.21037/gs-24-63. Epub 2024 Aug 20. Gland Surg. 2024. PMID: 39282034 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of short-term outcomes between pedicled- and free-flap autologous breast reconstruction: a nationwide inpatient database study in Japan.Breast Cancer. 2022 Nov;29(6):1067-1075. doi: 10.1007/s12282-022-01386-6. Epub 2022 Jul 18. Breast Cancer. 2022. PMID: 35849270
-
The Current State of the Art in Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Review and Modern/Future Approaches.J Clin Med. 2025 Feb 25;14(5):1543. doi: 10.3390/jcm14051543. J Clin Med. 2025. PMID: 40095465 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Donor Site Outcomes Following Autologous Breast Reconstruction with DIEP Flap: A Retrospective and Prospective Study in a Single Institution.Plast Surg (Oakv). 2024 May 20:22925503241255118. doi: 10.1177/22925503241255118. Online ahead of print. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2024. PMID: 39553506 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Wilkins EG, Cederna PS, Lowery JC, et al. Prospective analysis of psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: one-year postoperative results from the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study. Plast Reconstr Surg . 2002;106:1014–1025.
-
- Atisha D, Alderman AK, Lowery JC, et al. Prospective analysis of long-term psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: two-year postoperative results from the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Study. Ann Surg . 2008;247:1019–1028.
-
- Rowland JH, Desmond KA, Meyerowitz BE, et al. Role of breast reconstructive surgery in physical and emotional outcomes among breast cancer survivors. J Natl Cancer Inst . 2000;92:1422–1429.
-
- Al-Ghazal SK, Fallowfield L, Blamey RW. Comparison of psychological aspects and patient satisfaction following breast conserving surgery, simple mastectomy and breast reconstruction. Eur J Cancer . 2000;36:1938–1943.
-
- Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, et al. A paradigm shift in U.S. Breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg . 2013;131:15–23.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical