Skip to main content

A Comparison of Outcomes and Resource Utilization Between Plastic Surgeons and General Surgeons in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Chattha, A; Muste, J; Chen, AD; Patel, A
Published in: Ann Plast Surg
November 2019

BACKGROUND: Because of lack of patient education on the importance of surgeon certification and barriers to access a plastic surgeon (PS), non-PSs are becoming more involved in providing implant-based breast reconstruction procedures. We aim to clarify differences in outcomes and resource utilization by surgical specialty for implant-based breast reconstruction. METHODS: Data were obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2012 to 2014. Patients undergoing immediate implant-based reconstruction or immediate/delayed tissue expander-based reconstruction were identified (Current Procedural Terminology codes 19340 and 19357, respectively). Outcomes studied were major and wound-based 30-day complications, operation time, unplanned readmission or reoperation, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: We identified 9264 patients who underwent prosthesis or tissue expander-based breast reconstruction, 8362 (90.3%) by PSs and 902 (9.7%) by general surgeons (GSs). There were significant differences in major complications between specialty (1.2% PS vs 2.8% GS; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in unplanned reoperation (5.3% PS vs 4.9% GS; P = 0.592), unplanned readmissions (4.3% PS vs 3.8% GS; P = 0.555), wound dehiscence (0.7% PS vs 0.6% GS; P = 0.602), or wound-based infection rates (2.9% PS vs 2.8% GS; P = 0.866). As it pertains to resource utilization, the GS patients had a significantly longer length of stay (1.02 ± 4.41 days PS vs 1.62 ± 4.07 days GS; P < 0.001) and operative time (164.3 ± 97.6 minutes PS vs 185.4 ± 126.5 minutes; P = 0.001) than PS patients. CONCLUSIONS: This current assessment demonstrates that patients who undergo breast implant reconstruction by a GS have significantly more major complications. It is beneficial for the health care system for PSs to be the primary providers of breast reconstruction services. Measures should be taken to ensure that PSs are available and encouraged to provide this service.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Ann Plast Surg

DOI

EISSN

1536-3708

Publication Date

November 2019

Volume

83

Issue

5

Start / End Page

507 / 512

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Treatment Outcome
  • Surgery, Plastic
  • Surgery
  • Middle Aged
  • Humans
  • Health Resources
  • General Surgery
  • Female
  • Breast Implantation
  • Adult
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Chattha, A., Muste, J., Chen, A. D., & Patel, A. (2019). A Comparison of Outcomes and Resource Utilization Between Plastic Surgeons and General Surgeons in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg, 83(5), 507–512. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001887
Chattha, Anmol, Justin Muste, Austin D. Chen, and Ashit Patel. “A Comparison of Outcomes and Resource Utilization Between Plastic Surgeons and General Surgeons in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.Ann Plast Surg 83, no. 5 (November 2019): 507–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001887.
Chattha, Anmol, et al. “A Comparison of Outcomes and Resource Utilization Between Plastic Surgeons and General Surgeons in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.Ann Plast Surg, vol. 83, no. 5, Nov. 2019, pp. 507–12. Pubmed, doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000001887.

Published In

Ann Plast Surg

DOI

EISSN

1536-3708

Publication Date

November 2019

Volume

83

Issue

5

Start / End Page

507 / 512

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Treatment Outcome
  • Surgery, Plastic
  • Surgery
  • Middle Aged
  • Humans
  • Health Resources
  • General Surgery
  • Female
  • Breast Implantation
  • Adult