Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36547997›Full record

ArticleMedicines (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Breast Reconstruction: Economic Impact Swiss Health Insurance System.

Jeanne Martin, Pietro G di Summa, Wassim Raffoul, Nathalie Koch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicines (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jeanne MartinPlastic Reconstructive and Aesthetics Surgery Department, Lausanne University Hospital, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Pietro G di SummaPlastic Reconstructive and Aesthetics Surgery Department, Lausanne University Hospital, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Wassim RaffoulPlastic Reconstructive and Aesthetics Surgery Department, Lausanne University Hospital, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3524-0077
Nathalie KochPlastic Reconstructive and Aesthetics Surgery Department, Lausanne University Hospital, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8632-0843
University of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConsidering present concerns about healthcare costs and the lack of evidence and published articles on breast reconstruction costs in Switzerland, we retrospectively investigated charges to the Swiss healthcare system for different breast reconstruction procedures at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois.

methodsWe selected all hospitalized patients at the University Hospital who underwent a "total" delayed breast reconstruction from January 2012 to December 2015. Analysis included 72 women who underwent autologous or implant-based reconstructions. Three main breast reconstruction techniques were included: Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (n = 46) autologous flap reconstruction, Tissue Expander followed by Implant (n = 12) and pedicled Latissimus Dorsi (n = 12) flap with or without tissue expander and implant (n = 7). For all different groups, the global costs of reconstruction and total number of required operations were statistically compared.

resultsGlobal costs for Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator reconstruction were 29,728 ± 1892 CHF (avg ± Std. Error of Mean), while Tissue Expander reconstruction showed a significantly higher global cost, reaching an average of 44,313 ± 5553 CHF (avg ± Std. Error of Mean). LD showed a similar cost, compared to the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator reconstruction (29,813 ± 3637 CHF), increasing when including an implant (37,688 ± 4840 CHF). No significant differences in the number of interventions were detected.

conclusionThese data show that autologous breast reconstruction (DIEP) delivers the best cost ratio, with lower overall costs. Implant-based reconstructions showed a greater likelihood of complications and re-intervention, globally creating superior costs when compared to autologous reconstructions.

Indexed as

breast cancercostreconstructionSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID36547997
PMCPMC9787397
OpenAlexW4312140684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.