Plastic Surgery Research Council
Members Only  |  Contact  |  PSRC on Facebook
PSRC 60th Annual Meeting
Program and Abstracts

Back to 2015 Annual Meeting Program


Comparing the Sartorius versus the Rectus Femoris Flap in the Treatment of the Infected Vascular Graft Groin Wound: A Cost-Utility Analysis
Abhishek Chatterjee, MD, MBA1, Tomasz Kosowski, MD, MBA2, Bryan Pyfer, BS3, Julia Tchou, MD, PhD1, Carla Fisher, MD1, Sirish Maddali, MD4.
1University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2Miami Breast Center, Miami, FL, USA, 3Dartmouth Medical School, Lebanon, NH, USA, 4Plastic and Hand, Portland, ME, USA.

Purpose
A variety of options exist in the treatment of the infected vascular groin graft. The plastic and vascular surgery literature report on using the sartorius and rectus femoris flaps as reasonable coverage options. Both flap options incur cost and have variability in success. While literature exists comparing local flaps for infected groins clinically, there is minimal cost-analysis outcomes research in this area. Given this, our goal was to perform a cost-utility analysis of the sartorius flap versus the rectus femoris flap in the treatment of an infected vascular groin graft.
Methods
Cost-utility methodology involved a literature review compiling outcomes for specific flap interventions, obtaining utility scores for complications to estimate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), accruing costs using DRG and CPT codes for each intervention, and developing a decision tree that could portray the more cost-effective strategy. Complications were divided into major and minor categories with major including graft loss with axillary-femoral bypass, amputation, and death. Minor complications assumed graft salvage after local debridement for partial flap necrosis, seromas and hematomas. The upper limit for willingness to pay was set at \,000. We also performed sensitivity analysis to check the robustness of our data. Szilyagi III and Samson III and IV grades of infected groin grafts were included in our study.
Results
32 studies were used pooling 296 patients (234 sartorius flaps, 62 rectus flaps). Decision tree analysis noted that the rectus femoris flap was the more cost-effective option (Figure). It was the dominant treatment option given that it was more clinically effective by an additional 0.30 QALYs with the sartorius flap option costing an additional \,241.88. This lead to an incremental cost utility ratio (ICUR) of -\,472.93/QALY favoring the rectus femoris flap. A substantial contribution to these results was due to the sartorius flap having a 13.68% major complication rate versus an 8.6% major complication rate for the rectus femoris flap. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the sartorius flap became a cost-effective option if its major complication rate was less than or equal to 8.89%.
Conclusion
The rectus femoris flap in the treatment of the infected vascular groin graft is a cost-effective option compared to the sartorius flap. The rectus femoris flap is clinically more effective and less costly than its sartorius counterpart.


Back to 2015 Annual Meeting Program