Comparison of the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap and free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap in postmastectomy reconstruction: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Volumn 113, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 1650-1661

  Thoma, Achilleas ^a   Veltri, Karen ^a   Khuthaila, Dana ^a   Rockwell, Gloria ^a   Duku, Eric ^a  

^a NONE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; CANADA; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEEP INFERIOR EPIGASTRIC PERFORATOR FLAP; FREE TISSUE GRAFT; FREE TRANSVERSE RECTUS ABDOMINIS MYOCUTANEOUS FLAP; GRAFT REJECTION; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HERNIA; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MASTECTOMY; MODEL; OPERATION DURATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT FAILURE; ABDOMINAL WALL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; EPIGASTRIC ARTERY; FEMALE; METHODOLOGY; PLASTIC SURGERY; PROBABILITY; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; VASCULARIZATION;

ABDOMINAL WALL; CANADA; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EPIGASTRIC ARTERIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMAPLASTY; MASTECTOMY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROBABILITY; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SURGICAL FLAPS;

EID: 2442501362     PISSN: 00321052     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000117196.61020.FD     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Russell, L. B., Gold, M. R., Siegel, J. E., Daniels, N., and Weinstein, M. C. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine: Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. J.A.M.A. 276: 1172, 1996.
2. Eisenberg, J. M. Clinical economics: A guide to the economic analysis of clinical practices. J.A.M.A. 262: 2879, 1989.
3. Detsky, A. S., and Naglie, I. G. A clinicians' guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann. Intern. Med. 113: 147, 1990.
4. Drummond, M. F., O'Brien, B. J., Stoddart, G. L., and Torrance, G.W. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes, 2nd Ed. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
5. Sinclair, J. C., Torrance, G. W., Boyle, M. H., Horwood, S. P., Saigal, S., and Sackett, D. L. Evaluation of neonatal intensive care program. N. Engl. J. Med. 305: 489, 1981.
6. Kaplan, R. M. Health outcome models for policy analysis. Health Psychol. 8: 723, 1989.
7. Drummond, M. F., Richardson, W. S., O'Brien B. J., Levine, M., and Heyland, D. Users' guide to the medical literature: XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. J.A.M.A. 277: 1552, 1997.
8. Slavin, S. A., and Colen, S. R. Sixty consecutive breast reconstructions with the inflatable expander: A critical appraisal. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 86: 910, 1990.
9. Maxwell, G. P. Latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction: An aesthetic assessment. Clin. Plast. Surg. 8: 373, 1981.
10. Hartrampf, C. R., Jr. The transverse abdominal island flap for breast reconstruction: A 7-year experience. Clin. Plast. Surg. 15: 703, 1988.
11. Grotting, J. C., Urist, M. M., Maddox, W. A., and Vasconez, L. O. Conventional TRAM flap versus free microsurgical TRAM flap for immediate breast reconstruction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 83: 828, 1989.
12. Shaw, W. W. Superior gluteal free flap breast reconstruction. Clin. Plast. Surg. 25: 267, 1998.
13. Kroll, S. S., Evans, G. R., Reece, G. P., et al. Comparison of resource costs of free and conventional TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 98: 74, 1996.
14. Serletti, J. M., and Moran, S. L. Free versus the pedicled TRAM flap: A cost comparison and outcome analysis. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 100: 1418, 1997.
15. Larson, D. L., Yousif, J. N., Sinha, R. K., Latoni, J., and Korkos, T. G. A comparison of pedicled and free TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction in a single institution. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 104: 674, 1999.
16. Kaplan, J. L., and Allen, R. J. Cost-comparison between perforator flaps and TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 105: 943, 2000.
17. Kerrigan, C. L., and Collins, E. D. Are perforator flaps truly more cost-effective than TRAM flaps? How good is the evidence? Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 107: 881, 2001.
18. Thoma, A., Khuthaila, D., Rockwell, G., and Veltri, K. Cost-utility analysis comparing free and pedicled TRAM flap for breast reconstruction. Microsurgery 23: 287, 2003.
19. Thoma, A., Sprague, S., and Tandan, V. Users' guide to the surgical literature: How to use an article on economic analysis. Can. J. Surg. 44: 347, 2001.
20. Koshima, I., Namba, Y., Tsutsui, T., Takahashi, Y., and Itoh, S. Perforator flaps in lower extremity reconstruction. Handchir. Mikrochir. Plast. Chir. 34: 251, 2002.
21. Allen, R., and Treece, P. Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap for breast reconstruction. Ann. Plast. Surg. 32: 32, 1994.
22. Blondeel, P. N., Arnstein, M., Verstraete, K., et al. Venous congestion and blood flow in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous and deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 106: 1295, 2000.
23. Blondeel, N., Vanderstraeten, G. G., Monstrey, S. J., et al. The donor site morbidity of free DIEP flaps and free TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction. Br. J. Plast. Surg. 50: 322, 1997.
24. Hamdi, M., Weiler-Mithoff, E. M., and Webster, M. H. Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap in breast reconstruction: Experience with the first 50 flaps. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 103: 86, 1999.
25. Keller, A. The DIEP free flap for breast reconstruction. Ann. Plast. Surg. 46: 474, 2001.
26. Kroll, S. S. Fat necrosis in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous and deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 106: 576, 2000.
27. Blondeel, P. N. One hundred free DIEP flap reconstructions: A personal experience. Br. J. Plast. Surg. 52: 104, 1999.
28. Blondeel, P. Refinements in free flap reconstruction: The free bilateral deep inferior epigastric perforator flap anastomosed to the internal mammary artery. Br. J. Plast. Surg. 47: 495, 1994.
29. Nahabedian, M. Contour abnormalities of the abdomen after breast reconstruction with abdominal flaps: The role of muscle preservation. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 109: 91, 2002.
30. Arnez, Z. M., Khan, U., Pogorelec, D., and Planinsek, F. Rational selection of flaps from the abdomen in breast reconstruction to reduce donor site morbidity. Br. J. Plast. Surg. 52: 351, 1999.
31. Kroll, S. Postoperative morphine requirements of free TRAM and DIEP flaps. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 107: 338, 2001.
32. Kroll, S. Comparison of cost for DIEP and free TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 107: 1413, 2001.
33. Futter, C. M., Webster, M. H., Hagen, S., and Mitchell, S. L. A retrospective comparison of abdominal muscle strength following breast reconstruction with a free TRAM or DIEP flap. Br. J. Plast. Surg. 53: 578, 2000.
34. Gold, M. R., Stiegel, J. E., Russell, C. B., and Weinstein, M. C. Cost-Effectiveness in Health And Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
35. Ontario Ministry of Health. Ontario Ministry of Health Schedule of Benefits (Physician Services Under the Health Insurance Act). Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, April 2002.
36. Statistics Canada. Life expectancy at birth. Available at: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/health26.htm. Accessed January 24, 2004.
37. Baldwin, B. J., Schusterman, M. A., Miller, M. J., Kroll, S. S., and Wang, B. G. Bilateral breast reconstruction: Conventional versus free TRAM. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 93: 1410, 1994.
38. Serletti, J. M., and Moran, S. L. Free versus the pedicled TRAM flap: A cost comparison and outcome analysis. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 100: 1418, 1997.
39. Schusterman, M. A., Kroll, S. S., and Weldon, M. E. Immediate breast reconstruction: Why the free TRAM flap over the conventional TRAM flap? Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 90: 255, 1992.
40. Elliott, L. F., Eskenazi, L., Beegle, P. H., Jr., Podres, P. E., and Drazan, L. Immediate TRAM flap breast reconstruction: 128 consecutive cases. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 92: 217, 1993.
41. Laupacis, A., Feeny, D., Detsky, A. S., and Tugwell, P. X. How attractive does a technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 146: 473, 1992.
42. Naylor, C. D., Williams, J. E., Basinski, A., and Goel, V. Technology assessment and cost-effectiveness analysis: Misguided guidelines? Can. Med. Assoc. J. 148: 921, 1993.
43. Gafni, A., and Birch, S. Guidelines for the adoption of new technologies: A prescription for uncontrolled growth in expenditures and how to avoid the problem. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 148: 913, 1993.
44. Hirth, R. A., Chernew, M. E., Miller, E., Fenddrick, M., and Weissert, W. G. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: In search of a standard. Med. Decis. Making 20: 332, 2000.
45. O'Brien, B., Gertsen, K., Willan, A., and Faulkner, L. A. Is there a kink in consumers' threshold value for cost-effectiveness in health care? Health Econ. 11: 175, 2002.
46. Nathoe, H., van Dijk, D., Jansen, E. W. L., et al. A comparison of on-pump and off-pump coronary bypass surgery in low-risk patients. N. Engl. J. Med. 348: 394, 2003.
47. Aksoy, S. Can the "quality of life" be used as a criterion in health care services? Bull. Med. Ethics 162: 19, 2000.
48. Mehrez, A., and Gafni, A. Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy-years equivalents. Med. Decis. Making 9: 142, 1989.
49. Mehrez, A., and Gafni, A. The healthy-years equivalents: How to measure them using the standard gamble approach. Med. Decis. Making 11: 140, 1991.
50. Mehrez, A., and Gafni, A. Preference based outcome measures for economic evaluation of drug interventions: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus healthy years equivalents (HYEs). Pharmacoeconomics 1: 338, 1992.
51. Nord, E. Health status index models for use in resource allocation decisions: A critical review in the light of observed preferences for social choice. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care. 12: 31, 1996.
52. Fox-Rushby, J. A., and Hanson, K. Calculating and presenting disability adjusted life years (DALYs) in cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Policy Plan. 16: 326, 2001.
53. Torrance, G. W., Furlong, W. J., Feeny, D. H., and Boyle, M. Multi-attribute preference functions: Health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 7: 503, 1995.
54. Feeny, D. H., Furlong, W. J., Boyle, M. H., and Torrance, G. W. Multi-attribute health status classification systems: Health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 7: 490, 1995.
55. Feeny, D. H., Torrance, G. W., and Furlong, W. J. Health Utilities Index. In B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials, 2nd Ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996. Pp. 239-252.
56. The EuroQol Group. EuroQol: A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 16: 199, 1990.
57. Furlong, W., Feeny, D., Torrance, G., Barr, R., and Horsman, J. Guide to design and development of health-state utility instrumentation (Working Paper No. 90-99). Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: McMaster University, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, 1990.
58. Bennett, K. J., and Torrance, G. W. Measuring health state preferences and utilities: Rating scale, time trade-off and standard gamble techniques. In B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials, 2nd Ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996. Pp. 253-265.
59. Feeny, D., Torrance, G. W., and Labelle, R. Integrating economic evaluations and quality of life assessments. In B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials, 2nd Ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996. Pp. 85-95.