A cost-effectiveness analysis of DIEP vs free MS-TRAM flap for microsurgical breast reconstruction

Background and Objectives The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap may be associated with less long-term donor-site morbidity compared with free muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap (MS-TRAM) flap. However, DIEP flaps may have longer operative time and higher rates of acute postoperative complications. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) that compared the long-term costs and patient-reported outcomes between the two flaps. Methods A retrospective cohort of women who received free MS-TRAM or DIEP flap reconstruction between January 2008 and December 2012, with a minimum of 2-year follow-up, were recruited. Cost data of the primary reconstruction and any subsequent hospitalization due to complications from the reconstruction within 2 years were obtained. Each patient received a BREAST-Q questionnaire at 2 years post-reconstruction. Results In total, 227 patients (180 DIEP, 47 free MS-TRAM) were included. DIEP patients had significantly fewer abdominal hernia (P = 0.04). The adjusted-incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found that DIEP flap was more cost-effective to free MS-TRAM flap in the domains of "Physical Well-Being of the Abdomen" and "Satisfaction with Outcome." Conclusions DIEP flap is the more cost-effective method of autologous breast reconstruction in the long-term compared with free MS-TRAM flap with respect to patient-reported abdominal well-being and overall satisfaction with the outcome.