title: The use of AlloDerm in postmastectomy alloplastic breast reconstruction: part II. A cost analysis.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Increasingly, AlloDerm is being used in alloplastic breast reconstruction, and has been the subject of a recent systematic review. The authors' objective was to perform a cost analysis comparing direct-to-implant with AlloDerm reconstruction to two-stage non-AlloDerm reconstruction.
  
  
  METHODS
  Seven clinically important health outcomes and their probabilities for both types of reconstruction were derived from the recent review. A decision analytic model from the Canadian provincial payer's perspective was constructed based on these health states. Direct medical costs were estimated from a university-based hospital, yielding expected costs for direct-to-implant reconstruction with AlloDerm and two-stage non-AlloDerm reconstruction. Sensitivity analyses were conducted.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Baseline and expected costs were calculated for direct-to-implant AlloDerm and two-stage non-AlloDerm reconstruction. Direct-to-implant reconstruction with AlloDerm was found to be less expensive in the baseline ($10,240 versus $10,584) and expected cost ($10,734 versus $11,251) using a 6 × 16-cm AlloDerm sheet. With a 6 × 12-cm sheet, expected cost falls to $9673. By increasing direct-to-implant operative time from 2 hours to 2.5 hours, expected cost rises to $11,784. If capsular contracture rate requiring revision is set at 15 percent for both procedures, expected costs are $10,926 and $11,251 for direct-to-implant and two-stage procedures, respectively. If the capsular contracture rate is lowered for either procedure, this has minimal impact on expected cost.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Although AlloDerm is expensive, it appears to be cost-effective if used for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. The methods used here may be extrapolated to different centers incorporating local costs and complication rates. A formal randomized controlled trial, including costs, is recommended.
authors: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada From the Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of British Columbia.
authors: Leigh A
authors: LA
authors: Jansen
authors: Sheina A
authors: SA
authors: Macadam
references: Le GM, O'Malley CD, Glaser S, et al. Breast implants following mastectomy in women with early-stage breast cancer: Prevalence and impact on survival. Breast Cancer Res. 2005;7:R184–R193.
references: Spear SL, Pelletiere SC, Lockwood M. Immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders and AlloDerm. In: Spear SL, Willey SC, Robb GL, Hammond DC, Nahabedian MY, eds. Surgery of the Breast: Principles and Art. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006:484–488.
references: Breuing KH, Warren SM. Immediate bilateral breast reconstruction with implants and inferolateral AlloDerm slings. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;55:232–239.
references: Jansen LA, Macadam SA. The use of AlloDerm in postmastectomy alloplastic breast reconstruction: Part I. A systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:2232–2244.
references: Breuing KH, Colwell AS. Inferolateral AlloDerm hammock for implant coverage in breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2007;59:250–255.
references: Preminger BA, McCarthy CM, Hu QY, Mehrara BJ, Disa JJ. The influence of AlloDerm on expander dynamics and complications in the setting of immediate tissue expander/implant reconstruction: A matched-cohort study. Ann Plast Surg. 2008;60:510–513.
references: Namnoum JD. Expander/implant reconstruction with AlloDerm: Recent experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:387–394.
references: Derderian CA, Karp NS, Choi M. Wise-pattern breast reconstruction: Modification using AlloDerm and a vascularized dermal-subcutaneous pedicle. Ann Plast Surg. 2009;62:528–532.
references: Ashikari RH, Ashikari AY, Kelemen PR, Salzberg CA. Subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction for prevention of breast cancer for high-risk patients. Breast Cancer 2008;15:185–191.
references: Salzberg CA. Nonexpansive immediate breast reconstruction using human acellular tissue matrix graft (AlloDerm). Ann Plast Surg. 2006;57:1–5.
references: Topol BM, Dalton EF, Ponn T, Campbell CJ. Immediate single-stage breast reconstruction using implants and human acellular dermal tissue matrix with adjustment of the lower pole of the breast to reduce unwanted lift. Ann Plast Surg. 2008;61:494–499.
references: Zienowicz RJ, Karacaoglu E. Implant-based breast reconstruction with allograft. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120: 373–381.
references: Gamboa-Bobadilla GM. Implant breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56:22–25.
references: Margulies AG, Hochberg J, Kepple J, Henry-Tillman RS, Westbrook K, Klimberg VS. Total skin-sparing mastectomy without preservation of the nipple-areola complex. Am J Surg. 2005;190:907–912.
references: Spear SL, Parikh PM, Reisin E, Menon NG. Acellular dermis-assisted breast reconstruction. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2008;32:418–425.
references: Bindingnavele V, Gaon M, Ota KS, Kulber DA, Lee DJ. Use of acellular cadaveric dermis and tissue expansion in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60:1214–1218.
references: Kotsis SV, Chung KC. Fundamental principles of conducting a surgery economic analysis study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:727–735.
references: Thoma A, Jansen L, Sprague S. Outcomes in microsurgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:e303–e312.
references: Thoma A, Sprague S, Tandan V; Evidence-Based Surgery Working Group. Users' guide to the surgical literature: How to use an article on economic analysis. Can J Surg. 2001;44:347–354.
references: Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, Daniels N, Weinstein MC. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine: Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1172–1177.
references: Thoma A, Sprague S. Methodologic issues in the comparison of microsurgical flaps/techniques in head and neck reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg. 2005;32:347–359.
references: Kerrigan CL, Stanwix MG. Using evidence to minimize the cost of trigger finger care. J Hand Surg Am. 2009;34:997–1005.
references: de Bree R, Reith R, Quak JJ, Uyl-de Groot CA, van Agthoven M, Leemans CR. Free radial forearm flap versus pectoralis major myocutaneous flap reconstruction of oral and oropharyngeal defects: A cost analysis. Clin Otolaryngol. 2007;32:275–282.
references: Mastracci TM, Thoma A, Farrokhyar F, Tandan VR, Cinà CS; Evidence-Based Surgery Working Group. Users' guide to the surgical literature: How to use a decision analysis. Can J Surg. 2007;50:403–409.
references: Chun YS, Verma K, Rosen H, et al. Implant-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix and the risk of postoperative complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:429–436.
references: Spear SL. Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction versus complete submuscular coverage: A head-to-head comparison of outcomes (Discussion). Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1741–1742.
references: Sbitany H, Sandeen SN, Amalfi AN, Davenport MS, Langstein HN. Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction versus complete submuscular coverage: A head-to-head comparison of outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1735–1740.
references: Nahabedian MY. AlloDerm performance in the setting of prosthetic breast surgery, infection, and irradiation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1743–1753.
references: Chen WF, Barounis D, Kalimuthu R. A novel cost-saving approach to the use of acellular dermal matrix (AlloDerm) in postmastectomy breast and nipple reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:479–481.
references: Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon's 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: Part I. A prospective analysis of early complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;188:825–831.
references: Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon's 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: Part II. An analysis of long-term complications, aesthetic outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;188:832–839.
references: Cunningham BC. The Mentor core study on silicone MemoryGel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120:19S–29S.
references: Bengston BP, Van Natta BW, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Maxwell GP; Style 410 U.S. Core Clinical Study Group. Style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implant core study results at 3 years. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120:40S–48S.