Disparities in Care Among Gunshot Victims: A Nationwide Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Given the well-known healthcare disparities most pronounced in racial and ethnic minorities, trauma healthcare in underrepresented patients should be examined, as in-hospital bias may influence the care rendered to patients. This study seeks to examine racial differences in outcomes and resource utilization among victims of gunshot wounds in the United States. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) conducted from 2007 to 2017. The NTDB was queried for patients who suffered a gunshot wound not related to accidental injury or suicide. Patients were stratified according to race. The primary outcome for this study was mortality. Secondary outcomes included racial differences in resource utilization including air transport and discharge to rehabilitation centers. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare differences in outcomes between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 250,675 patients were included in the analysis. After regression analysis, Black patients were noted to have greater odds of death compared to White patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, confidence interval [CI] 1.037-1.244; P = 0.006) and decreased odds of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) (OR 0.76, CI 0.732-0.794; P < 0.001). Hispanic patients were significantly less likely to be discharged to rehabilitation centers (Hispanic: 0.78, CI 0.715-0.856; P < 0.001). Black patients had the shortest time to death (median time in minutes: White 49 interquartile range [IQR] [9-437] versus Black 24 IQR [7-205] versus Hispanic 39 IQR [8-379] versus Asian 60 [9-753], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As society carefully examines major institutions for implicit bias, healthcare should not be exempt. Greater mortality among Black patients, along with differences in other important outcome measures, demonstrate disparities that encourage further analysis of causes and solutions to these issues.

Oncoplastic breast reconstruction: Principles, current techniques, and future directions.

Oncoplastic breast reconstruction has improved esthetic results after breast-conserving surgery with low complication rates and stable oncologic outcomes. Basic principles can be applied across different volume displacement and replacement techniques including restoration of breast shape and symmetry through esthetic incisions while eliminating dead space. Technique selection is guided by several factors including breast size, resection-to-breast ratio, and patient desires. A surgeon familiar with all techniques will allow individualization of treatment and optimization of outcomes.

Direct-to-implant versus autologous tissue transfer: A meta-analysis of patient-reported outcomes after immediate breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The effect of immediate implant and autologous breast reconstruction on complication rates has been studied extensively; however, the patient-reported outcomes for these procedures during immediate, one-stage reconstruction has yet to be comprehensively investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the patient-reported outcomes for immediate implant reconstruction with those associated with immediate autologous reconstruction to determine the advantages and disadvantages for each modality from the patient's perspective. METHODS: A literature search of PubMed between 2010 and 2021 was performed, and 21 studies containing patient-reported outcomes were selected for the analysis. A meta-analysis of patient-reported outcome scores was performed separately for immediate breast reconstruction using autologous tissue transfer and synthetic implants. RESULTS: Nineteen manuscripts were included, representing data on a total of 1342 patients across all studies. The pooled mean of patients' satisfaction with their breasts was 70.7 (95% CI, 69.4-72.0) after immediate autologous reconstruction and 68.5 (95% CI, 67.1-69.9) after immediate implant reconstruction, showing a statistically significant difference in outcomes (p < 0.05). The pooled mean of patients' sexual well-being was 59.3 (95% CI, 57.8-60.8) after immediate autologous reconstruction and 62.8 (95% CI, 60.7-64.8) after immediate implant reconstruction (p < 0.01). The pooled mean of patients' satisfaction with their outcome was 78.8 (95% CI, 76.2-81.3) after immediate autologous reconstruction and 82.3 (95% CI, 80.4-84.1) after immediate implant reconstruction (p < 0.05). The results of each meta-analysis were summarized on forest plots depicting the distribution of patient-reported outcome scores from each study. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate reconstruction with implants may have a similar or greater capacity to achieve patient satisfaction and improve patients' QoL compared to those associated with immediate reconstruction with autologous tissue transfer when both procedures are available.