The role of plastic surgery in sarcoma treatment

Cost-effectiveness of Multidisciplinary Care in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary care has been previously shown to improve outcomes for patients and providers alike, fostering interprofessional collaboration and communication. Many studies have demonstrated the beneficial health care outcomes of interdisciplinary care. However, there has been minimal focus on the cost-effectiveness of such care, particularly in the realm of plastic surgery. This is the first systematic review to examine cost savings attributable to plastic surgery involvement in multidisciplinary care.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review of articles published on cost outcomes associated with multidisciplinary teams including a plastic surgeon was performed. Included articles reported on cost outcomes directly or indirectly attributable to a collaborative intervention. Explicitly reported cost savings were totaled on a per-patient basis. Each article was also reviewed to determine whether the authors ultimately recommended the team-based intervention described.

RESULTS

A total of 604 articles were identified in the initial query, of which 8 met the inclusion criteria. Three studies reported explicit cost savings from multidisciplinary care, with cost savings ranging from $707 to $26,098 per patient, and 5 studies reported changes in secondary factors such as complication rates and length of stay. All studies ultimately recommended multidisciplinary care, regardless of whether cost savings were achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary plastic surgery care examined both primary cost savings and associated quality outcomes, such as length of stay, complication rate, and resource consumption. Our findings indicate that the inclusion of plastic surgery in team-based care provides both direct and indirect cost savings to all involved parties.

Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with soft tissue sarcoma by the Spanish group for research in sarcomas (GEIS)

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) constitute an uncommon and heterogeneous group of tumours, which require a complex and specialized multidisciplinary management. The diagnostic approach should include imaging studies and core needle biopsy performed prior to undertaking surgery. Wide excision is the mainstay of treatment for localized sarcoma, and associated preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy should be administered in high-risk patients. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a modest improvement in survival in a meta-analysis and constitutes a standard option in selected patients with high-risk STS. In metastatic patients, surgery must be evaluated in selected cases. In the rest of patients, chemotherapy and, in some subtypes, targeted therapy often used in a sequential strategy constitutes the treatment of election. Despite important advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease, the advances achieved in therapeutic results may be deemed still insufficient. Moreover, due to the rarity and complexity of the disease, the results in clinical practice are not always optimal. For this reason, the Spanish Group for Research on Sarcoma (GEIS) has developed a multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines document, with the aim of facilitating the diagnosis and treatment of these patients in Spain. In the document, each practical recommendation is accompanied by level of evidence and grade of recommendation on the basis of the available data.

Ghost Protocol: Greatest Healing Opportunity for Soft Tissue, a Treatment Paradigm for Complex Sarcoma Reconstruction

Modern sarcoma treatment has created new challenges for plastic surgeons. This study was designed to review the recent experience and practice patterns following complex sarcoma resection at a large sarcoma center. All cases from October 2013 to October 2014 involving rare nonepithelial tumors, a multidisciplinary surgical team, radiation and/or chemotherapy treatments, and plastic surgical reconstruction were included in the analysis. In addition to evaluating clinical outcomes, cases were reviewed to identify factors associated with excellent or poor patient care. Review of these cases formed the basis of the greatest healing opportunity for soft tissue (GHOST) protocol. Our patient population included seven males (64%) and four females (36%). All except one patient was exposed to radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or some combination. Diverse procedures were used for reconstruction. Early complications occurred in two patients (18%), and late complications in four patients (36%). Sarcoma resection was found to be highly morbid in our series. Patients with poor preoperative nutritional status were more likely to experience complications postoperatively. The decision to stage a reconstruction was complex and influenced by several factors. Multimodal sarcoma treatments may involve highly morbid procedures and create complex wounds. The GHOST protocol is a useful reference for plastic surgeons.