Background: The aim of breast reconstruction after mastectomy is to improve quality of life and patient satisfaction, but cost-effectiveness of different reconstruction techniques remains uncertain due to methodological limitations in existing studies. High-quality trial-based economic evaluations are therefore needed. This study aimed to compare the quality of life and cost outcomes of patients randomized to different delayed breast reconstruction techniques based on previous receipt of radiotherapy. Methods: A single-site randomized controlled trial (GoBreast; NCT03963427) including women aged 18–60 undergoing delayed breast reconstruction was conducted. Patients without previous radiotherapy were randomized to either thoracodorsal flap with implant (TD) or two-stage expander (EXP), while patients with previous receipt of radiotherapy were randomized to either latissimus dorsi with implant (LD) or deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap. Outcomes included health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (by SF-6D utilities), re-operations, and direct/indirect costs over long-term follow-up. Results: Among patients without previous radiotherapy ( n = 75), EXP had slightly lower direct healthcare costs, but higher indirect costs, and generated a statistically significant positive change in HRQoL utility value (0.06 (0.02;0.9)) and fewer re-operations (2.34 vs 4.73) during a mean follow-up of 12.9 years. Among patients who had received radiotherapy ( n = 25), there were no statistically significant differences in HRQoL utility scores or total costs, but a higher re-operation rate for LD as compared to DIEP. Conclusion: Among patients without previous radiotherapy, EXP yielded superior HRQoL and fewer re-operations compared to TD. In patients with previous receipt of radiotherapy, DIEP reconstruction was associated with fewer re-operations and comparable costs compared to LD.
Brorson et al. (Tue,) studied this question.