Search

Purpose: The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) ranks neighborhoods by deprivation based on US Census data. This study utilizes ADI scores to investigate the impact of neighborhood deprivation on complication rates following breast reconstruction., Patients and Methods: Patients who received implant-based reconstruction from 2019 to 2023 were identified at a single institution in New York. Patients were linked to a state-specific ADI score and categorized into groups: "High ADI" (6-10) and "Low ADI" (1-5). Patient characteristics and complication rates were compared between the ADI groups with Chi-Square analysis and t-tests. The predictive value of ADI scores on complication rates was assessed using logistic regression models., Results: In total, 471 patients were included, of which 16% (n = 73) were in the High ADI group, and 84% (n = 398) were in the Low ADI group. There were no baseline differences between the 2 groups, except that there were more patients of Hispanic descent in the High ADI group (30% vs. 15%, P < .01). The High ADI group had a higher overall complication rate than the Low ADI group (34% vs. 21%, P < .01), as well as higher individual rates of hematoma (12% vs. 3%, P < .01) and unexpected reoperations (18% vs. 7%, P < .01). After adjusting for differences in race, High ADI scores predicted hematoma, reoperations, and any complication (P < .05)., Conclusion: Patients living in neighborhoods with high ADI had a higher incidence of postoperative complications, independent of comorbidities and race. This measure of disparity should be considered when counselling patients about their risk of complications following procedures like implant-based breast reconstruction., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have no other potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many factors influence a patient's decision to undergo autologous versus implant-based breast reconstruction, including medical, social, and financial considerations. This study aims to investigate differences in out-of-pocket and total spending for patients undergoing autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction., Methods: The IBM MarketScan Commercial Databases were queried to extract all patients who underwent inpatient autologous or implant-based breast reconstruction from 2017 to 2021. Financial variables included gross payments to the provider (facility and/or physician) and out-of-pocket costs (total of coinsurance, deductible, and copayments). Univariate regressions assessed differences between autologous and implant-based reconstruction procedures. Mixed-effects linear regression was used to analyze parametric contributions to total gross and out-of-pocket costs., Results: The sample identified 2079 autologous breast reconstruction and 1475 implant-based breast reconstruction episodes. Median out-of-pocket costs were significantly higher for autologous reconstruction than implant-based reconstruction ($597 vs $250, P < 0.001) as were total payments ($63,667 vs $31,472, P < 0.001). Type of insurance plan and region contributed to variable out-of-pocket costs (P < 0.001). Regression analysis revealed that autologous reconstruction contributes significantly to increasing out-of-pocket costs (B = $597, P = 0.025) and increasing total costs (B = $74,507, P = 0.006)., Conclusion: The US national data demonstrate that autologous breast reconstruction has higher out-of-pocket costs and higher gross payments than implant-based reconstruction. More study is needed to determine the extent to which these financial differences affect patient decision-making., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The current standard of practice in implant-based breast reconstruction is irrigation of the mastectomy pocket with antimicrobial solution before implant placement. Prior to being banned and formally recalled in January 2020, bacitracin was a very commonly utilized antibiotic. This study characterizes the effects of the national bacitracin ban on implant-based breast reconstruction infection rates by using a nationwide database to compare complication rates before and after bacitracin was banned., Materials and Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried retrospectively for all patients who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction before the bacitracin ban (2012-2019) and afterwards (2020). Demographics, comorbidities, and complications were collected. Univariate analysis and multivariate analysis were conducted to determine if there were significant changes in wound complications, local wound infections, and systemic infections between the 2 case-control matched cohorts., Results: A total of 37,126 patients were in the pre-ban cohort and 6333 patients were in the post-ban cohort. Before matching, there were significant differences in race distribution, BMI, ASA class, inpatient vs. outpatient status, preoperative smoking, and preoperative diabetes mellitus (all P < .05). After case-control matching, there were 6313 patients in each cohort. Univariate analysis revealed differences in postoperative superficial and organ space surgical site infection, wound complications/infections, all cause complications, and reoperations (all P < .05). Multivariate analysis showed that patients who underwent breast reconstruction before the ban had decreased odds of having wound infections, related infections, all cause complications, and reoperations (all P < .05)., Conclusion: This study provides a macroscopic view into the effects of the formal injectable bacitracin ban on breast reconstruction outcomes. Patients who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction after the ban of injectable bacitracin had higher odds of developing wound infections, related infections, and reoperations. More study into suitable alternatives to injectable bacitracin for surgical site antimicrobial irrigation is warranted., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Breast cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related death in US Hispanic women. When present, lower health literacy levels potentially within this patient population require tailored materials to address health disparities. We aim to evaluate and compare Spanish and English online health care informative resources on preventive mastectomy., Methods: A Google web search using "preventive mastectomy" and "mastectomía preventiva" was conducted. The first ten institutional/organizational websites in each language were selected. Assessment of mean reading grade level, cultural sensitivity, understandability, and actionability was carried out utilizing validated tools., Results: The mean reading grade level for English materials was 14.69 compared with 11.3 for Spanish, both exceeding the recommended grade level established by the AMA and NIH. The mean cultural sensitivity score for English information was 2.20 compared with 1.88 for Spanish information, both below the acceptability benchmark of 2.5. English webpages scored 65% and 35% for understandability and actionability, respectively, while Spanish webpages scored 47% and 18%., Conclusions: Online English and Spanish preventive mastectomy materials were written at an elevated reading level and lacked cultural sensitivity. Spanish language information demonstrated inferior understandability, actionability, and cultural sensitivity. Addressing these issues provides an opportunity to help resolve health literature disparities regarding preventive mastectomy for US Hispanic women.