A controlled cost and outcomes analysis of acellular dermal matrix and implant-based reconstruction.
Acellular Dermis
Breast Implantation
/ adverse effects
Breast Implants
Cost Savings
Female
Humans
Mammaplasty
/ adverse effects
Mastectomy
/ adverse effects
Middle Aged
Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Quality of Life
Tissue Expansion
/ adverse effects
Tissue Expansion Devices
Acellular dermal matrix
Breast reconstruction
Implant-based reconstruction
Mastectomy
Journal
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS
ISSN: 1878-0539
Titre abrégé: J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101264239
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
17
01
2020
revised:
29
08
2020
accepted:
22
10
2020
pubmed:
3
2
2021
medline:
16
6
2021
entrez:
2
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) for breast reconstruction continues to change in both single- and two-stage reconstruction. Determining optimal outcomes clinically, aesthetically, financially as well as for the patient's quality of life has become a priority. A retrospective review of implant-based reconstructions was performed at a single center from 2010 to 2016, with patients blindly matched 1:1:1 into three cohorts based on reconstruction type: 1) single stage direct to implant with ADM, 2) two-stage tissue expander to implant (TE/I) without ADM, and 3) two-stage TE/I with ADM. Relative cost between groups, esthetic outcomes, and quality of life within each group was analyzed. Group 1 was more likely to be older and use intraoperative angiography, but with fewer overall surgeries and postoperative visits (p<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in reconstructive success among all three groups (p = 0.85). Cost was significantly higher for group 3 relative to groups 1 and 2. Overall appearance was higher in groups 1 and 3 relative to group 2, with radiation therapy the only independent factor. Group 1 had higher scores using Breast-Q for the physical well-being domain (p = 0.01). This is the first study to incorporate clinical outcomes, esthetic visual grading, and patient-reported quality within the same cohort of individuals, considering both use of ADM and staging. Despite the added ADM cost, it is proven safe, eliminates time and cost associated with tissue expanders, decreases post-operative visits and can lead to equally as functional and aesthetically pleasing outcomes in single- and two-stage breast reconstructions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33526361
pii: S1748-6815(20)30576-3
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.10.079
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1229-1238Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest This study was supported by funding from Allergan. No other conflict of interest among authors.