Propensity-matched, longitudinal outcomes analysis of complications and cost: comparing abdominal free flaps and implant-based breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND

Choosing a breast reconstructive modality after mastectomy is an important step in the reconstructive process. The authors hypothesized that autologous tissue is associated with a greater success rate and cost efficacy over time, relative to implant reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing free tissue (FF) transfer and expander implant (E/I) reconstruction between 2005 and 2011. Variables evaluated included comorbidities, surgical timing, complications, overall outcomes, unplanned reoperations, and costs. A propensity-matching technique was used to account for the nonrandomized selection of modality.

RESULTS

A total of 310 propensity-matched patients underwent 499 reconstructions. No statistically significant differences in preoperative variables were noted between propensity-matched cohorts. Operative characteristics were similar between FF and E/I reconstructions. The E/I reconstruction was associated with a significantly higher rate of reconstructive failure (5.6% vs 1.2%, p < 0.001). Expander implant reconstructions were associated with higher rates of seroma (p = 0.009) and lower rates of medical complications (p = 0.02), but overall significantly higher rates of unplanned operations (15.5% vs 5.8%, p = 0.002). The total cost of reconstruction did not differ significantly between groups ($23,120.49 ± $6,969.56 vs $22,739.91 ± $9,727.79, p = 0.060), but E/I reconstruction was associated with higher total cost for secondary procedures ($10,157.89 ± $8,741.77 vs $3,200.71 ± $4,780.64, p < 0.0001) and a higher cost of unplanned revisions over time (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our matched outcomes analysis does demonstrate a higher overall, 2-year success rate using FF reconstruction and a significantly lower rate of unplanned surgical revisions and cost. Although autologous reconstruction is not ideal for every patient, these findings can be used to enhance preoperative discussions when choosing a reconstructive modality.