Comparison of the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap and Free Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flap in Postmastectomy Reconstruction: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study compared the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap and the free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap in postmastectomy reconstruction using a cost-effectiveness analysis. A decision analytic model was used. Medical costs associated with the two techniques were estimated from the Ontario Ministry of Health Schedule of Benefits for 2002. Hospital costs were obtained from St. Joseph's Healthcare, a university teaching hospital in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. The utilities of clinically important health states related to breast reconstruction were obtained from 32 "experts" across Canada and converted into quality-adjusted life years. The probabilities of these various clinically important health states being associated with the DIEP and free TRAM flaps were obtained after a thorough review of the literature. The DIEP flap was more costly than the free TRAM flap ($7026.47 versus $6508.29), but it provided more quality-adjusted life years than the free TRAM flap (28.88 years versus 28.53 years). The baseline incremental cost-utility ratio was $1464.30 per quality-adjusted life year, favoring adoption of the DIEP flap. Sensitivity analyses were performed by assuming that the probabilities of occurrence of hernia, abdominal bulging, total flap loss, operating room time, and hospital stay were identical with the DIEP and free TRAM techniques. By assuming that the probability of postoperative hernia for the DIEP flap increased from 0.008 to 0.054 (same as for TRAM flap), the incremental cost-utility ratio changed to $1435.00 per quality-adjusted life year. A sensitivity analysis was performed for the complication of hernia because the DIEP flap allegedly diminishes this complication. Increasing the probability of abdominal bulge from 0.041 to 0.103 for the DIEP flap changed the ratio to $2731.78 per quality-adjusted life year. When the probability of total flap failure was increased from 0.014 to 0.016, the ratio changed to $1384.01 per quality-adjusted life year. When the time in the operating room was assumed to be the same for both flaps, the ratio changed to $4026.57 per quality-adjusted life year. If the hospital stay was assumed to be the same for both flaps, the ratio changed to $1944.30 per quality-adjusted life year. On the basis of the baseline calculation and sensitivity analyses, the DIEP flap remained a cost-effective procedure. Thus, adoption of this new technique for postmastectomy reconstruction is warranted in the Canadian health care system.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle