Cargando…

The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis

BACKGROUND: INTEGRA(®) Dermal Regeneration Template is a well-known and widely used acellular dermal matrix. Although it helps to solve many challenging problems in reconstructive surgery, the product cost may make it an expensive alternative compared to other reconstruction procedures. This retrosp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schiavon, M., Francescon, M., Drigo, D., Salloum, G., Baraziol, R., Tesei, J., Fraccalanza, E., Barbone, F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5133275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27699461
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-016-0703-0
_version_ 1782471236503207936
author Schiavon, M.
Francescon, M.
Drigo, D.
Salloum, G.
Baraziol, R.
Tesei, J.
Fraccalanza, E.
Barbone, F.
author_facet Schiavon, M.
Francescon, M.
Drigo, D.
Salloum, G.
Baraziol, R.
Tesei, J.
Fraccalanza, E.
Barbone, F.
author_sort Schiavon, M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: INTEGRA(®) Dermal Regeneration Template is a well-known and widely used acellular dermal matrix. Although it helps to solve many challenging problems in reconstructive surgery, the product cost may make it an expensive alternative compared to other reconstruction procedures. This retrospective study aims at comparing INTEGRA-based treatment to flap surgery in terms of cost and benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We considered only patients treated for scalp defects with bone exposure in order to obtain two groups as homogeneous as possible. We identified two groups of patients: 17 patients treated with INTEGRA and 18 patients treated with flaps. All patients were admitted in our institution between 2004 and 2010, and presented a defect of the scalp following trauma or surgery for cancer, causing a loss of the soft tissues of the scalp with bone exposure without pericranium. To calculate the cost in constant euros of each treatment, three parameters were evaluated for each patient: cost of the surgical procedure (number of doctors and nurses involved, surgery duration, anesthesia, material used for surgery), hospitalization cost (hospitalization duration, dressings, drugs, topical agents), and outpatient cost (number of dressing changes, personnel cost, dressings type, anti-infective agents). The statistical test used in this study was the Wilcoxon Mann–Whitney (α = 0.05). RESULTS: No significant difference was characterized between the two groups for gender, age, presence of diabetes, mean defect size, and number of surgical procedures. All patients healed with good quality and durable closure. The median total cost per patient was €11,121 (interquartile range (IQR) 8327–15,571) for the INTEGRA group and €7259 (IQR 1852–24,443) for the flap group (p = 0.34). A subgroup of patients (six patients in the INTEGRA group and five patients in the flap group) showing defects larger than 100 cm(2) were considered in a second analysis. Median total cost was €11,825 (IQR 10,695–15,751) for the INTEGRA group and €23,244 (IQR 17,348–26,942) for the flap group. CONCLUSION: Both treatments led to a good healing of the lesions with formation of soft and resistant tissue. No significant difference was characterized between the two groups for days of hospitalization and costs. In cases of patients with defects larger than 100 cm(2) for whom major surgery is needed, the treatment with INTEGRA seemed to be less expensive than the treatment with free flaps or pedicle flaps. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the A5 online Instructions to Authors.www.springer.com/00266.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5133275
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51332752016-12-19 The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis Schiavon, M. Francescon, M. Drigo, D. Salloum, G. Baraziol, R. Tesei, J. Fraccalanza, E. Barbone, F. Aesthetic Plast Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: INTEGRA(®) Dermal Regeneration Template is a well-known and widely used acellular dermal matrix. Although it helps to solve many challenging problems in reconstructive surgery, the product cost may make it an expensive alternative compared to other reconstruction procedures. This retrospective study aims at comparing INTEGRA-based treatment to flap surgery in terms of cost and benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We considered only patients treated for scalp defects with bone exposure in order to obtain two groups as homogeneous as possible. We identified two groups of patients: 17 patients treated with INTEGRA and 18 patients treated with flaps. All patients were admitted in our institution between 2004 and 2010, and presented a defect of the scalp following trauma or surgery for cancer, causing a loss of the soft tissues of the scalp with bone exposure without pericranium. To calculate the cost in constant euros of each treatment, three parameters were evaluated for each patient: cost of the surgical procedure (number of doctors and nurses involved, surgery duration, anesthesia, material used for surgery), hospitalization cost (hospitalization duration, dressings, drugs, topical agents), and outpatient cost (number of dressing changes, personnel cost, dressings type, anti-infective agents). The statistical test used in this study was the Wilcoxon Mann–Whitney (α = 0.05). RESULTS: No significant difference was characterized between the two groups for gender, age, presence of diabetes, mean defect size, and number of surgical procedures. All patients healed with good quality and durable closure. The median total cost per patient was €11,121 (interquartile range (IQR) 8327–15,571) for the INTEGRA group and €7259 (IQR 1852–24,443) for the flap group (p = 0.34). A subgroup of patients (six patients in the INTEGRA group and five patients in the flap group) showing defects larger than 100 cm(2) were considered in a second analysis. Median total cost was €11,825 (IQR 10,695–15,751) for the INTEGRA group and €23,244 (IQR 17,348–26,942) for the flap group. CONCLUSION: Both treatments led to a good healing of the lesions with formation of soft and resistant tissue. No significant difference was characterized between the two groups for days of hospitalization and costs. In cases of patients with defects larger than 100 cm(2) for whom major surgery is needed, the treatment with INTEGRA seemed to be less expensive than the treatment with free flaps or pedicle flaps. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the A5 online Instructions to Authors.www.springer.com/00266. Springer US 2016-10-03 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5133275/ /pubmed/27699461 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-016-0703-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Schiavon, M.
Francescon, M.
Drigo, D.
Salloum, G.
Baraziol, R.
Tesei, J.
Fraccalanza, E.
Barbone, F.
The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis
title The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis
title_full The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis
title_fullStr The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis
title_full_unstemmed The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis
title_short The Use of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template Versus Flaps for Reconstruction of Full-Thickness Scalp Defects Involving the Calvaria: A Cost–Benefit Analysis
title_sort use of integra dermal regeneration template versus flaps for reconstruction of full-thickness scalp defects involving the calvaria: a cost–benefit analysis
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5133275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27699461
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-016-0703-0
work_keys_str_mv AT schiavonm theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT francesconm theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT drigod theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT salloumg theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT baraziolr theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT teseij theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT fraccalanzae theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT barbonef theuseofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT schiavonm useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT francesconm useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT drigod useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT salloumg useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT baraziolr useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT teseij useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT fraccalanzae useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis
AT barbonef useofintegradermalregenerationtemplateversusflapsforreconstructionoffullthicknessscalpdefectsinvolvingthecalvariaacostbenefitanalysis