A Cost-Utility Analysis Comparing Immediate Oncoplastic Surgery with Delayed Oncoplastic Surgery in Smoking Breast Cancer Patients.

[BACKGROUND] Oncoplastic reduction mammoplasty for smoking breast cancer patients committed to smoking cessation may be performed immediately (increasing smoking-related risk) or in a delayed fashion (increasing radiation-related risk).

[OBJECTIVE] Our aim was to examine the cost utility of immediate versus delayed oncoplastic reconstruction when operating on a smoking patient with breast cancer and macromastia with a long-term commitment to smoking cessation.

[METHODS] A literature review determined the probabilities and outcomes for the treatment of unilateral breast cancer with immediate or delayed oncoplastic surgery. Reported utility scores were used to estimate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for varying health states. A decision analysis tree was constructed with rollback analysis to highlight the more cost-effective strategy, and an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to validate the robustness of the results.

[RESULTS] Immediate oncoplastic surgery is associated with a higher clinical effectiveness (QALY) of 33.3 compared with delayed oncoplastic surgery (33.26), with a higher increment of clinical effectiveness of 0.07 and relative cost reduction of $3458.11. This resulted in a negative ICUR of -50,194, which favored immediate reconstruction, indicating a dominant strategy. In one-way sensitivity analyses, delayed reconstruction was the more cost-effective strategy if the probability of successful immediate reconstruction falls below 29% or its cost exceeds $29,611. Monte-Carlo analysis showed a confidence of 99% that immediate oncoplastic surgery is more cost effective.

[CONCLUSIONS] Despite the risk of postoperative complications associated with smoking, immediate oncoplastic surgery is more cost effective compared with delayed oncoplastic surgery in which reconstructive surgery would occur after radiation.