A Comparison of Acellular Dermal Matrix to Autologous Dermal Flaps in Single-Stage, Implant-Based Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background: The use of acellular dermal matrix has allowed for single-stage immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy at a significantly decreased cost compared with two-stage expander/implant reconstruction. The use of a pedicled autologous dermal flap in the same fashion as acellular dermal matrix in women with larger, ptotic breasts has also allowed for single-stage immediate breast reconstruction with similarly low complication rates and without the added procedural cost of using acellular dermal matrix. There have been no prior studies evaluating whether the added procedural cost for acellular dermal matrix is cost-effective relative to using an autologous dermal flap in single-stage immediate breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify published complication rates for single-stage, implant-based immediate breast reconstruction using either acellular dermal matrix or an autologous dermal flap. The probabilities of the most common complications were combined with Medicare Current Procedural Terminology reimbursement codes and expert utility estimates to fit into a decision model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix. Results: The decision model revealed a baseline cost difference of $261.72 and a 0.001 increase in the quality-adjusted life years when using acellular dermal matrix, yielding an incremental cost-utility ratio of $261,720 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis showed that acellular dermal matrix was not cost-effective when the complication rate for autologous dermal flaps was below 20 percent. Conclusions: The authors’ study demonstrates that acellular dermal matrix is not a cost-effective technology in patients who can have an autologous dermal flap in single-stage immediate breast reconstruction.

[1]  G. Scambia,et al.  Immediate Definitive Prosthetic Reconstruction in Patients With Ptotic Breasts , 2013, Annals of plastic surgery.

[2]  Bernard T. Lee,et al.  Cost Analysis of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction With Acellular Dermal Matrix , 2012, Annals of plastic surgery.

[3]  G. Ross One stage breast reconstruction following prophylactic mastectomy for ptotic breasts: the inferior dermal flap and implant. , 2012, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[4]  F. Amersi,et al.  One-Stage Immediate Breast Reconstruction With Implants: A New Option for Immediate Reconstruction , 2012, Annals of plastic surgery.

[5]  Andrew L. Weinstein,et al.  The Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix in Immediate Two-Stage Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction , 2012, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[6]  A. Colwell,et al.  Retrospective Review of 331 Consecutive Immediate Single-Stage Implant Reconstructions with Acellular Dermal Matrix: Indications, Complications, Trends, and Costs , 2011, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[7]  J. Lipa,et al.  Comparison of Implant-Based Immediate Breast Reconstruction with and without Acellular Dermal Matrix , 2011, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[8]  J. May,et al.  Postoperative Complications in Prosthesis-Based Breast Reconstruction Using Acellular Dermal Matrix , 2011, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[9]  A. Chatterjee,et al.  A Cost, Profit, and Efficiency Analysis of Performing Carpal Tunnel Surgery in the Operating Room Versus the Clinic Setting in the United States , 2011, Annals of plastic surgery.

[10]  A. Ashikari,et al.  An 8-Year Experience of Direct-to-Implant Immediate Breast Reconstruction Using Human Acellular Dermal Matrix (AlloDerm) , 2011, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[11]  D. Lazzeri,et al.  Skin-reducing mastectomy: New refinements , 2010, Journal of plastic surgery and hand surgery.

[12]  A. Arriaga,et al.  Acellular Human Dermis Implantation in 153 Immediate Two-Stage Tissue Expander Breast Reconstructions: Determining the Incidence and Significant Predictors of Complications , 2010, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[13]  Sami U. Khan,et al.  The Effect of Acellular Dermal Matrix Use on Complication Rates in Tissue Expander/Implant Breast Reconstruction , 2010, Annals of plastic surgery.

[14]  E. A. Goldenberg,et al.  Opportunity cost in the evaluation of surgical innovations: a case study of laparoscopic versus open colectomy , 2010, Surgical Endoscopy.

[15]  Y. Kulahci,et al.  Skin-Reducing Subcutaneous Mastectomy Using a Dermal Barrier Flap and Immediate Breast Reconstruction with an Implant: A New Surgical Design for Reconstruction of Early-Stage Breast Cancer , 2010, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[16]  J. Vernon,et al.  Social Welfare and Adolescent Vaccination Programs in the United States: The Economic Opportunities for a Systematic Expansion , 2009, Social work in public health.

[17]  S. Finlayson,et al.  Opportunity cost: a systematic application to surgery. , 2009, Surgery.

[18]  T. Ponn,et al.  Immediate Single-Stage Breast Reconstruction Using Implants and Human Acellular Dermal Tissue Matrix With Adjustment of the Lower Pole of the Breast to Reduce Unwanted Lift , 2008, Annals of plastic surgery.

[19]  S. Grosse Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold , 2008, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[20]  E. Karacaoğlu,et al.  Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction with Allograft , 2007, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[21]  G. Rovere,et al.  Skin-Reducing Mastectomy , 2006, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[22]  M. Meek,et al.  Nonexpansive Immediate Breast Reconstruction Using Human Acellular Tissue Matrix Graft (AlloDerm) , 2006, Annals of plastic surgery.

[23]  E. Duku,et al.  Comparison of the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap and Free Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flap in Postmastectomy Reconstruction: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , 2004, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[24]  Gloria Rockwell,et al.  Cost‐utility analysis comparing free and pedicled TRAM flap for breast reconstruction , 2004, Microsurgery.

[25]  A S Detsky,et al.  How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. , 1992, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.