Suppr超能文献

英国乳房重建的经济可行性:274 例患者中单名外科医生采用假体、LD、TRAM 和 DIEP 进行乳房重建的经验比较。

The economic viability of breast reconstruction in the UK: comparison of a single surgeon's experience of implant; LD; TRAM and DIEP based reconstructions in 274 patients.

机构信息

Department of Plastic Surgery, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, London W6 8RF, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2011 Jun;64(6):710-5. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2010.11.001. Epub 2010 Nov 26.

Abstract

A retrospective audit was performed of patients undergoing breast reconstruction under the care of the senior author from 2000 to 2007. We documented reconstruction type, length of stay and total number of revisions. Income to the trust based on the 2008/9 HRG codes along with any "top ups" was also recorded. This was compared to calculations of cost to the trust of performing each reconstruction. 274 patients had 278 primary reconstructions and a further 366 revisions. Only patients with a minimum one-year's follow-up were included (mean 3 years). This included 68 DIEPs'; 39 TRAMs'; 98 LDs'; and 73 implant reconstructions. The median length of stay for implant based reconstruction was 4 days; 9 for LD flaps; 11 for TRAMs' and 8 for DIEPs'. This was significantly shorter for the implant group compared to other reconstructions (P<0.001). The mean number of surgical revisions was 1.5 for implant reconstructions; 1.6 for LDs; 0.9 for TRAMs' and 0.8 for DIEPs'. There were significantly more revisions of implant reconstructions than DIEPs (P=0.037) and significantly more revisions of LDs compared to TRAM and DIEPs' (P=0.012 and 0.0023). In our study, the cost of an LD, TRAM or DIEP reconstruction including both primary surgery and any revisions was similar, and while at an average of three years, the implant reconstruction remains cheaper, that patient will still require more revisions, and if followed up enough will lose this small financial benefit. Furthermore, the difference is small (£8034 for implants vs. £10910 for DIEPs), and it could be argued this is justified by the increased patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome. Finally we highlight several areas of financial inequality, including insufficient remuneration for providing individual operations, the lack of payment for performing more than one procedure at the same time and lack of payment for bilateral procedures.

摘要

对 2000 年至 2007 年期间在资深作者的治疗下接受乳房重建的患者进行了回顾性审计。我们记录了重建类型、住院时间和总修订次数。还记录了根据 2008/9 HRG 代码向信托基金支付的收入以及任何“追加款项”。将其与信托基金执行每次重建的成本计算进行了比较。274 名患者接受了 278 次初次重建和 366 次进一步修正。仅包括至少有一年随访的患者(平均 3 年)。这包括 68 例 DIEP;39 例 TRAM;98 例 LD;和 73 例植入物重建。植入物重建的中位住院时间为 4 天;LD 皮瓣为 9 天;TRAM 为 11 天;DIEP 为 8 天。与其他重建相比,植入物组的时间明显更短(P<0.001)。植入物重建的平均手术修订次数为 1.5;LD 为 1.6;TRAM 为 0.9;DIEP 为 0.8。植入物重建的修订次数明显多于 DIEP(P=0.037),LD 重建的修订次数明显多于 TRAM 和 DIEP(P=0.012 和 0.0023)。在我们的研究中,LD、TRAM 或 DIEP 重建的成本,包括初次手术和任何修订,都相似,虽然平均随访时间为 3 年,但植入物重建仍然更便宜,但该患者仍将需要更多的修订,如果随访足够,将失去这种小的经济利益。此外,差异很小(植入物为 8034 英镑,DIEP 为 10910 英镑),可以说这是由于患者满意度和美容效果提高而得到的补偿。最后,我们强调了几个财务不平等领域,包括提供个别手术的报酬不足、同时进行多项手术的报酬不足以及双侧手术的报酬不足。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验