Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
More women than ever before are undergoing mastectomies secondary to increased awareness and screening. This increase has also caused a corresponding increase in the number of breast reconstructions requested each year. The increased demand for reconstruction has fueled recent advances in new techniques. Aside from foreign-body reconstruction such as implants, the methods now being used are related to autogenous donations and reconstruction. Transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flaps and perforator flaps are currently being used for autogenous breast reconstruction. This study will compare these two techniques on the basis of cost and length of stay. A retrospective study of 49 patients undergoing a total of 64 perforator flap breast reconstructions at Memorial Medical Center in New Orleans, Louisiana, during the 1997 calendar year was used. There were 59 deep inferior epigastric perforator and five gluteal artery perforator breast reconstructions. All patients underwent some form of breast reconstruction and differed only in respect to whether a mastectomy was performed and whether the reconstruction was unilateral or bilateral. Those patients who underwent a mastectomy with immediate perforator flap reconstruction (n = 26) were then compared with patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate TRAM flap reconstruction (n = 154) at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. The data from the Anderson Study were obtained from material published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in 1996. Comparison of patients was limited to those who underwent mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction because this was the design of the M. D. Anderson study. This approach allowed a cost and length of stay comparison while keeping other variables relatively similar. Patients in the perforator flap series enjoyed a marginally shorter operating time and a much shorter length of stay. On average, the operative time for all perforator flap reconstructions was approximately 2 hours shorter than for all TRAM flaps. As for length of stay, perforator flap patients were discharged, on average, 3 days after the initial reconstruction. In contrast, TRAM flap patients remained in the hospital for an average of approximately 7 days after the initial reconstruction. The overall total, average cost for the perforator flap reconstruction in this study is 9625, whereas the average cost of all TRAM flaps performed in the Anderson study is 18, 070.
Kaplan et al. (Wed,) studied this question.