Search

Background: Variability in breast reconstruction methods provides an opportunity to investigate whether a method is superior to another with regard to cost, quality, or both. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) study based on tertiary endpoint data from a randomized clinical trial to compare the cost-effectiveness of delayed breast reconstruction by either a latissimus dorsi flap (LD) or a thoracodorsal artery perforator flap (TAP). Material & methods: A total of 50 women were included for unilateral delayed breast reconstruction and were randomized to reconstruction by either the LD flap (n = 18) or the TAP flap (n = 22). The CEA was based on differences in shoulder function after the reconstruction. Direct and indirect costs relating to the two procedures were assessed by the Danish Diagnosis-Related Groups tariffs. Results: Our analysis showed a significant positive effect of introducing the TAP flap on the total shoulder score with an additional cost of $2779. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $4481 and based on a willingness to pay (WTP) $500, we found an estimated net benefit of $519, which was statistically significant (p = 0.0375). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve indicated that there is a 96.3% probability for the TAP flap being cost-effective to the LD flap at a WTP threshold of $500. Conclusion: From a societal perspective, our cost-effective analysis demonstrated that the TAP flap is the more cost-effective method of breast reconstruction compared to the LD flap with respect to patient-reported shoulder-related disability.

Background: Variability in breast reconstruction methods provides an opportunity to investigate whether a method is superior to another with regard to cost, quality, or both. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) study based on tertiary endpoint data from a randomized clinical trial to compare the cost-effectiveness of delayed breast reconstruction by either a latissimus dorsi flap (LD) or a thoracodorsal artery perforator flap (TAP). Material & methods: A total of 50 women were included for unilateral delayed breast reconstruction and were randomized to reconstruction by either the LD flap (n = 18) or the TAP flap (n = 22). The CEA was based on differences in shoulder function after the reconstruction. Direct and indirect costs relating to the two procedures were assessed by the Danish Diagnosis-Related Groups tariffs. Results: Our analysis showed a significant positive effect of introducing the TAP flap on the total shoulder score with an additional cost of $2779. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $4481 and based on a willingness to pay (WTP) $500, we found an estimated net benefit of $519, which was statistically significant (p = 0.0375). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve indicated that there is a 96.3% probability for the TAP flap being cost-effective to the LD flap at a WTP threshold of $500. Conclusion: From a societal perspective, our cost-effective analysis demonstrated that the TAP flap is the more cost-effective method of breast reconstruction compared to the LD flap with respect to patient-reported shoulder-related disability.

Background: This paper presents the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that focus on health-related quality-of-life (QoL) and patient-reported satisfaction following breast reconstruction with pedicled flaps from the back. Materials & Methods: We included women for unilateral delayed breast reconstruction. Patients were randomized to reconstruction by either a latissimus dorsi (LD) flap or a thoracodorsal artery perforator (TAP) flap. Assessment of QoL and patient satisfaction was made using two different patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): The EORTC QLQ-30 and the Breast-Q questionnaire for post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. Results: A total of 50 women were enrolled over a two-year period and allocated to reconstruction. Forty patients completed both surgery and follow-up and were included in the analysis – 18 in the LD group and 22 in the TAP group. The EORTC QLQ-30 was administered at the baseline and at one-year follow-up. There was no significant effect of introducing the TAP flap on either the summary score, the global QoL-score or the financial impact-score when compared to the LD flap. The Breast-Q questionnaire was administered only at one-year follow-up. There was no significant difference between the two groups for the scores for satisfaction with the reconstructed breast, the overall outcome and QoL related to psycho-social, sexual and physical well-being. Conclusion: Women from both groups report high satisfaction and QoL following the reconstruction. The quality of the dataset and the study design are, however, insufficient to rule out any existing difference. A larger cohort, longer follow-up and different design are warranted to assess the true clinical significance these reconstructions might have on satisfaction and QoL.

BACKGROUND: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigates differences in shoulder-related morbidity after delayed breast reconstruction by either a latissimus dorsi (LD) flap or a thoracodorsal artery perforater (TAP) flap.MATERIAL AND METHODS: In accordance with the CONSORT guidelines, we included women for unilateral delayed breast reconstruction. Patients were randomized to reconstruction by either of the two flaps. Shoulder-function was assessed at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. The primary endpoint was patient-reported shoulder-related pain. A further objective assessment by the Constant Shoulder Score (CSS) was included as secondary endpoints.RESULTS: A total of 50 women were enrolled over a two-year period and allocated to reconstruction, with 25 patients in each group. Patient-reported shoulder-related pain was significantly lower in the TAP group at 12 months after surgery when adjusting for pain at baseline: OR = 0.05 95%CI(0.005-0.51), p-value = 0.011. The estimated effect on the total CSS at 12 months, when applying the TAP flap instead of the LD flap and adjusting for the baseline score, was 6.2 points with 95%CI(0.5-12.0), p-value 0.033. The TAP flap seems to have a statistically significant positive effect on pain and activity in daily life (ADL), while there were no significant effect on range of motion and strength after one year.CONCLUSION: Patient reconstructed by the TAP flap are less likely to experience shoulder-related pain and have a better shoulder-function one year after the reconstruction. Harvest of the LD flap carries a higher risk of shoulder-function impairment, chronic pain and reduced ADL.