Ashley J R Kilchenmann1, Alessia M Lardi2, Mark Ho-Asjoe3, Klaus Junge4, Jian Farhadi3. 1. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, Aesthetic and Hand Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031 Basel, Switzerland; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Rd, SE1 7EH London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: ashley.kilchenmann@stud.unibas.ch. 2. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, Aesthetic and Hand Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031 Basel, Switzerland; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Rd, SE1 7EH London, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Rd, SE1 7EH London, United Kingdom. 4. Premier Research Germany Ltd., Europaplatz 5, 64293 Darmstadt, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate resource utilization of single stage porcine acellular dermal matrix (ADM) assisted breast reconstruction compared with tissue expander (TE), latissimus dorsi flap and implant (LD/I) and latissimus dorsi flap and TE (LD/TE) reconstructive techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical data was collected for length of stay, operative time, additional hospitalisations and operative procedures, and outpatient appointments for 101 patients undergoing unilateral implant based breast reconstruction. Resources utilised by ADM (Strattice Reconstructive Tissue Matrix™) patients were analysed and compared to the resource usage of traditional techniques. RESULTS: 25 patients undergoing single stage ADM (ADM/I) were compared with 27 having TE, 32 having LD/I and 17 having LD/TE reconstructions. Follow up was 24 months. Compared to TE, ADM/I had similar length of stay and operative time, lower rate and number of additional procedures, fewer, shorter re-admissions (p < 0.05) and fewer appointments (p < 0.05). Compared to LD/TE, ADM/I had shorter length of stay and operative time (p < 0.05), lower rate and number of additional procedures, fewer, shorter re-admissions (p < 0.05) and fewer appointments (p < 0.05). Compared to LD/I, ADM/I had shorter length of stay (p < 0.05) and operative time (p < 0.05), fewer appointments, similar rate and number of additional procedures but required more and longer re-admissions. CONCLUSION: In our experience, unilateral single stage ADM/I was associated with fewer resources utilised in comparison with two staged TE and LD/TE reconstructions in both complication-free and complicated settings over a 24-month period, despite requiring aesthetic revision in 60.9% of patients. Compared to LD/I, resource utilisation was commensurate in complication-free and complicated settings.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate resource utilization of single stage porcine acellular dermal matrix (ADM) assisted breast reconstruction compared with tissue expander (TE), latissimus dorsi flap and implant (LD/I) and latissimus dorsi flap and TE (LD/TE) reconstructive techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical data was collected for length of stay, operative time, additional hospitalisations and operative procedures, and outpatient appointments for 101 patients undergoing unilateral implant based breast reconstruction. Resources utilised by ADM (Strattice Reconstructive Tissue Matrix™) patients were analysed and compared to the resource usage of traditional techniques. RESULTS: 25 patients undergoing single stage ADM (ADM/I) were compared with 27 having TE, 32 having LD/I and 17 having LD/TE reconstructions. Follow up was 24 months. Compared to TE, ADM/I had similar length of stay and operative time, lower rate and number of additional procedures, fewer, shorter re-admissions (p < 0.05) and fewer appointments (p < 0.05). Compared to LD/TE, ADM/I had shorter length of stay and operative time (p < 0.05), lower rate and number of additional procedures, fewer, shorter re-admissions (p < 0.05) and fewer appointments (p < 0.05). Compared to LD/I, ADM/I had shorter length of stay (p < 0.05) and operative time (p < 0.05), fewer appointments, similar rate and number of additional procedures but required more and longer re-admissions. CONCLUSION: In our experience, unilateral single stage ADM/I was associated with fewer resources utilised in comparison with two staged TE and LD/TE reconstructions in both complication-free and complicated settings over a 24-month period, despite requiring aesthetic revision in 60.9% of patients. Compared to LD/I, resource utilisation was commensurate in complication-free and complicated settings.
Authors: Michael Zenn; Mark Venturi; Troy Pittman; Scott Spear; Geoffrey Gurtner; Geoffrey Robb; Alex Mesbahi; Joseph Dayan Journal: Eplasty Date: 2017-06-12