A Multi-institutional Analysis of a Textbook Outcome Among Patients Undergoing Microvascular Breast Reconstruction
Ronnie L Shammas,Abbas M Hassan,Amanda R Sergesketter,Nicholas L Berlin,Humza N Mirza,Natalie M Guzman,Hani I Naga,Perri Vingan,Janhavi G Govande,Max L Silverstein,Arash Momeni,Geoffroy C Sisk,Rene D Largo,Adeyiza O Momoh,Jonas A Nelson,Evan Matros,Brett T Phillips
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000003950
2024-06-01
Abstract:Background: Individual outcomes may not accurately reflect the quality of perioperative care. Textbook outcomes (TOs) are composite metrics that provide a comprehensive evaluation of hospital performance and surgical quality. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and predictors of TOs in a multi-institutional cohort of patients who underwent breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps. Methods: For autologous reconstruction, a TO was previously defined as a procedure without intraoperative complications, reoperation, infection requiring intravenous antibiotics, readmission, mortality, systemic complications, operative duration ≤12 hours for bilateral and ≤10 hours for unilateral/stacked reconstruction, and length of stay (LOS) ≤5 days. We investigated associations between patient-level factors and achieving a TO using multivariable regression analysis. Results: Of 1000 patients, most (73.2%) met a TO. The most common reasons for deviation from a TO were reoperation (9.6%), prolonged operative time (9.5%), and prolonged LOS (9.2%). On univariate analysis, tobacco use, obesity, widowed/divorced marital status, and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy or bilateral reconstruction were associated with a lower likelihood of TOs (P < 0.05). After adjustment, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (odds ratio [OR], 5.71; P = 0.029) and hormonal therapy (OR, 1.53; P = 0.050) were associated with a higher likelihood of TOs; higher body mass index (OR, 0.91; P = <0.001) was associated with a lower likelihood. Conclusion: Approximately 30% of patients did not achieve a TO, and the likelihood of achieving a TO was influenced by patient and procedural factors. Future studies should investigate how this metric may be used to evaluate patient and hospital-level performance to improve the quality of care in reconstructive surgery.