Dataset Information

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure and its economic impact is significant. This study aimed to analyse whether a direct one-stage IBBR with use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is more cost-effective than two-stage (expander-implant) breast reconstruction. METHODS:The BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage) study was an open-label multicentre RCT in which women scheduled for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate IBBR were randomized between one-stage IBBR with ADM or two-stage IBBR. Duration of surgery and hospital stay, and visits for the primary surgery, unplanned and cosmetic procedures were recorded. Costs were estimated at an institutional level. Health status was assessed by means of the EuroQol Five Dimensions 5L questionnaire. RESULTS:Fifty-nine patients (91 breasts) underwent one-stage IBBR with ADM and 62 patients (92 breasts) two-stage IBBR. The mean(s.d.) duration of surgery in the one-stage group was significantly longer than that for two-stage IBBR for unilateral (2·52(0·55) versus 2·02(0·35) h; P?

SUBMITTER: Negenborn VL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6593424 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

Negenborn V L VL Smit J M JM Dikmans R E G REG Winters H A H HAH Twisk J W R JWR Ruhé P Q PQ Mureau M A M MAM Tuinder S S Eltahir Y Y Posch N A S NAS van Steveninck-Barends J M JM van der Hulst R R W J RRWJ Ritt M J P F MJPF Bouman M-B MB Mullender M G MG

The British journal of surgery 20190305 5

<h4>Background</h4>Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure and its economic impact is significant. This study aimed to analyse whether a direct one-stage IBBR with use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is more cost-effective than two-stage (expander-implant) breast reconstruction.<h4>Methods</h4>The BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage) study was an open-label multicentre RCT in which women scheduled for skin-sparing mastectomy an ...[more]

PMID: 30835827

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in one-stage immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (BR) may offer advantages over the two-stage expander-to-implant technique, but literature shows conflicting results. The aim of the present study was to compare these two techniques for immediate implant-based BR regarding postoperative complications, aesthetic correction procedures and aesthetic outcome.MethodsThe study was designed as an observational cohort study with 44 participants admitted for immediate implant-based BR at Department of Plastic Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. 21 patients underwent BR with a one-stage direct-to-implant technique using ADM and 23 patients underwent BR with a two-stage expander-to-implant technique. Follow-up time was 2 years.ResultsThe risk of implant loss was equal between groups; one-stage group 16% and two-stage group 17% whereas the risk of implant exchange (but not loss of BR) was 13% in the one-stage group compared to 7% in the two-stage group. The risk of at least one major complication were equal between groups; 28% and 24% but the risk of at least one minor complication was significantly higher in the two-stage group (41%) compared to the one-stage group (3%). Number of aesthetic corrections were equally frequent in the two treatment groups (one-stage group 1.8, two-stage group 1.5). Patient and investigator assessed aesthetic outcome was very high in both groups as well as the degree of symmetry between breasts. No capsular contracture Baker grade 3 or 4 was observed.ConclusionsThe present study design sets limitations for drawing wide conclusions. This study did not reveal any significant differences between the two breast reconstructive techniques besides a higher risk of minor complications in the two-stage group, that did, however, not lead to a higher risk of implant loss. With equally high satisfaction with the aesthetic result and no significant difference in number of aesthetic corrections between the two groups we suggest, that the one-stage approach using ADM may be feasible and allows the patient to achieve an implant-based BR with a minimum of surgeries and outpatient visits. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04209010).

Project description:BackgroundReconstructive options that can be used following conservative mastectomy, skin-, nipple-sparing and skin-reducing mastectomies, allow a remarkable variety of safe methods to restore the natural shape and aesthetics of the breast mound. In case of two-stage breast reconstruction, tissue expanders (TEs) are usually placed in a subpectoral position. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of two-step reconstruction with TE in pre-pectoral position covered by acellular dermal matrix (ADM).MethodsBetween March 2021 and May 2023, at the Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, University of Florence, 55 patients with BRCA 1/2 mutations or early breast cancer underwent conservative mastectomy with immediate pre-pectoral reconstruction using TE covered with ADM, followed by a second surgery with replacement of the expander with definitive prosthesis. Demographic, oncological, and histological data along with surgical complications were recorded.ResultsA total of 64 conservative mastectomies were performed. In 2 patients (3.1%) complications were found that required reintervention and, in both cases, the TE had to be removed. Two patients developed hematoma and one patient developed seroma. Two patients showed wound dehiscence, both healed after conservative treatment and without implant exposure. No case of necrosis of the skin or nipple-areola complex has been observed, neither of capsular contracture. Capsule formed around TE was populated with cells and blood vessels and showed a thin area of synovial metaplasia.ConclusionsIn selected cases it may be more cautious to perform a two-stage breast reconstruction after radical breast surgery by means of TEs. The placement of TEs in pre-pectoral position combines the excellent aesthetic and functional results of the pre-pectoral philosophy with a quite safer and more prudent two-step approach. Our experience reports optimistic results: the ADM covering the TE is seen successfully integrating during tissue expansion and becoming a vascularised new self-tissue. Complications rates are low and such ADM-assisted two-stage pre-pectoral reconstructive technique is a safe, practical, and reproducible method.

Project description:The two-stage tissue expander/implant (TE/I) reconstruction is currently the gold standard method of implant-based immediate breast reconstruction in North America. Recently, however, there have been numerous case series describing the use of one-stage direct to implant reconstruction with the aid of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). In order to rigorously investigate the novel application of ADM in one-stage implant reconstruction, we are currently conducting a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to evaluate the impact on patient satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) compared to the two-stage TE/I technique.The MCCAT study is a multicenter Canadian ADM trial designed as a two-arm parallel superiority trial that will compare ADM-facilitated one-stage implant reconstruction compared to two-stage TE/I reconstruction following skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) or nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) at 2 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. The source population will be members of the mastectomy cohort with stage T0 to TII disease, proficient in English, over the age of 18 years, and planning to undergo SSM or NSM with immediate implant breast reconstruction. Stratified randomization will maintain a balanced distribution of important prognostic factors (study site and unilateral versus bilateral procedures). The primary outcome is patient satisfaction and QOL as measured by the validated and procedure-specific BREAST-Q. Secondary outcomes include short- and long-term complications, long-term aesthetic outcomes using five standardized photographs graded by three independent blinded observers, and a cost effectiveness analysis.There is tremendous interest in using ADM in implant breast reconstruction, particularly in the setting of one-stage direct to implant reconstruction where it was previously not possible without the intermediary use of a temporary tissue expander (TE). This unique advantage has led many patients and surgeons alike to believe that one-stage ADM-assisted implant reconstruction should be the procedure of choice and should be offered to patients as the first-line treatment. We argue that it is crucial that this technique be scientifically evaluated in terms of patient selection, surgical technique, complications, aesthetic outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and most importantly patient-reported outcomes before it is promoted as the new gold standard in implant-based breast reconstruction.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00956384.

Project description:ImportanceThe use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in implant-based breast reconstructions (IBBRs) is established practice. Existing evidence validating ADMs proposed advantages, including improved cosmetics and more single-stage IBBRs, is lacking.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether IBBR with ADM results in fewer reoperations and increased health-related quality of life (HRQoL) compared with conventional IBBR without ADM.Design, setting, and participantsThis was an open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of women with primary breast cancer who planned for mastectomy and immediate IBBR, with a 2-year follow-up for all participants. Participants were enrolled at 5 breast cancer units in Sweden and the United Kingdom between 2014 and May 2017. Exclusion criteria included previous radiotherapy and neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Data were analyzed until August 2017.InterventionsParticipants were allocated to immediate IBBR with or without ADM.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary trial end point was number of reoperations at 2 years. HRQoL, a secondary end point, was measured as patient-reported outcome measures using 3 instruments from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire.ResultsFrom start of enrollment on April 24, 2014, to close of trial on May 10, 2017, a total of 135 women were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 50.4 [9.5] years); 64 were assigned to have an IBBR procedure with ADM and 65 to the control group who had IBBR without ADM. There was no statistically significant difference between groups for the primary outcome. Of 129 patients analyzed at 2-year follow-up, 44 of 64 (69%) had at least 1 surgical event in the ADM group vs 43 of 65 (66%) in the control group. In the ADM group, 31 patients (48%) had at least 1 reoperation on the ipsilateral side vs 35 (54%) in the control group. The overall number of reoperations on the ipsilateral side were 42 and 43 respectively. Within the follow-up time of 24 months, 9 patients (14%) in the ADM group had the implant removed compared with 7 (11%) in the control group. We found no significant mean differences in postoperative patient-reported HRQoL domains, including perception of body image (mean difference, 3; 99% CI, -11 to 17; P = .57) and satisfaction with cosmetic outcome (mean difference, 8; 99% CI, -6 to 20; P = .11).Conclusions and relevanceImmediate IBBR with ADM did not yield fewer reoperations compared with conventional IBBR without ADM, nor was IBBR with ADM superior in terms of HRQoL or patient-reported cosmetic outcomes. Patients treated for breast cancer contemplating ADM-supported IBBR should be informed about the lack of evidence validating ADM's suggested benefits.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02061527.

Dataset Information

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

Publications

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets