Resource Cost Comparison of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction versus TRAM Flap Breast Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relatively little has been published to date comparing the resource costs of transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap and prosthetic breast reconstruction. The data that have been published reflect the experience at just one medical center with a previously known clear preference for autologous breast reconstruction. The goal of this study was to compare the resource costs of TRAM flap and prosthetic reconstruction in an institution where both procedures continue to be performed using modern techniques and at a relatively equivalent frequency. All available medical records were reviewed for patients who had completed their breast reconstruction between 1987 and 1997. Records of patients who had undergone TRAM flap or prosthetic reconstruction were reviewed to compare resource costs, including hospital stay, operating room time, anesthesia time, prosthetic devices, and physician's fees. Of 835 patients reviewed who had completed breast reconstruction, a total of 140 suitable patients were identified who had all the necessary financial information available. The patient population comprised 64 patients who received TRAM flaps and 76 patients who had undergone prosthetic reconstruction. The length of stay for the TRAM flap group, including all subsequent admissions for each patient, ranged from 2 to 24 days (mean, 6.25 days), and that for the prosthetic reconstruction group ranged from 0 to 20 days (mean, 4.36 days). Operating room time for the complete multistage reconstructive process for a TRAM flap ranged from 5 hours, 20 minutes to 12 hours, 25 minutes (mean, 7 hours, 34 minutes); with implant-based reconstruction, operating time ranged from 1 hour, 45 minutes to 8 hours, 56 minutes (mean, 4 hours, 6 minutes). With prostheses costing from $600 to $1200, a surgeon's fee of $160/hour, and an assistant's fee of $45/hour, the average cost of TRAM flap reconstructions was $19,607 (range, $11,948 to $49,402), compared with $15,497 for prosthetic reconstructions (range, $6422 to $40,015). The results were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Several factors weigh into the decision as to which reconstructive operation best suits the patient's needs. These factors include surgical risk, potential morbidity, and aesthetic results. On the basis of this review of autologous and prosthetic breast reconstruction in an institution where both are performed frequently, during a 10-year period with a mean time elapsed since reconstruction of 7.45 years, prosthetic reconstruction was significantly less expensive.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".