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
. 2022 Oct 20;12(1):17512.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-21675-6.

Cost analysis of pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction

Affiliations

Cost analysis of pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction

Sachin Chinta et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

With improvement in mastectomy skin flap viability and increasing recognition of animation deformity following sub-pectoral implant placement, there has been a transition toward pre-pectoral breast reconstruction. While studies have explored the cost effectiveness of implant-based breast reconstruction, few investigations have evaluated cost with respect to pre-pectoral versus sub-pectoral breast reconstruction. A retrospective review of 548 patients who underwent mastectomy and implant-based breast reconstruction was performed from 2017 to 2020. The demographic and surgical characteristics of the pre-pectoral and sub-pectoral cohorts were well matched, except for reconstructive staging, as patients who underwent pre-pectoral reconstruction were more likely to undergo single-stage instead of two-stage reconstruction. Comparison of institutional cost ratios by reconstructive technique revealed that the sub-pectoral approach was more costly (1.70 ± 0.44 vs 1.58 ± 0.31, p < 0.01). However, further stratification by laterality and reconstructive staging failed to demonstrate difference in cost by reconstructive technique. These results were confirmed by multivariable linear regression, which did not reveal reconstructive technique to be an independent variable for cost. This study suggests that pre-pectoral breast reconstruction is a cost-effective alternative to sub-pectoral breast reconstruction and may confer cost benefit, as it is more strongly associated with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Eric C. Liao has served as consultants for Abbvie, Inc, Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation, Integra Inc, and is explicitly not a speaker for any industry entity. There are no other disclosures.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trends in utilization of pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction as a percentage of total reconstruction procedures performed within a single year (based on full patient cohort, n = 548). This figure shows the trends in utilization of pre-pectoral and sub-pectoral breast reconstruction from the years of 2017 to 2020. The inflection transition point of the two reconstructive techniques occurs between the years of 2017 and 2018.

References

    1. Fitzpatrick AM, et al. Cost and outcome analysis of breast reconstruction paradigm shift. Ann. Plast. Surg. 2014;73:141–149. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318276d979. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Albornoz CR, et al. Implant breast reconstruction and radiation: A multicenter analysis of long-term health-related quality of life and satisfaction. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2014;21:2159–2164. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3483-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Malata CM, McIntosh SA, Purushotham AD. Immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer. Br. J. Surg. 2000;87:1455–1472. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2000.01593.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Panchal H, Matros E. Current trends in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2017;140:7s–13s. doi: 10.1097/prs.0000000000003941. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nelson JA, et al. Elective revisions after breast reconstruction: Results from the mastectomy reconstruction outcomes consortium. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2019;144:1280–1290. doi: 10.1097/prs.0000000000006225. - DOI - PMC - PubMed