Barriers of Three-Dimensional Printing in Craniofacial Plastic Surgery Practice: A Pilot Study and Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: Three-dimensional printing (3Dp) and modeling have demonstrated increasing utility within plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS). This study aims to understand the prevalence of how this technology is utilized in craniofacial surgery, as well as identify barriers that may limit its integration into practice. METHODS: A survey was developed to assess participant demographics, characteristics of 3Dp use, and barriers to utilizing three-dimensional technologies in practice. The survey was distributed to practicing craniofacial surgeons. A secondary literature review was conducted to identify solutions for barriers and potential areas for innovation. RESULTS: Fifteen complete responses (9.7% response rate) were analyzed. The majority (73%) reported using three-dimensional modeling and printing in their practice, primarily for surgical planning. The majority (64%) relied exclusively on outside facilities to print the models, selecting resources required to train self and staff (55%), followed by the cost of staff to run the printer (36%), as the most common barriers affecting 3Dp use in their practice. Of those that did not use 3Dp, the most common barrier was lack of exposure (75%). The literature review revealed cost-lowering techniques with materials, comparability of desktop commercial printers to industrial printers, and incorporation of open-source software. CONCLUSIONS: The main barrier to integrating 3Dp in craniofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery practice is the perceived cost associated with utilizing the technology. Ongoing literature highlights the cost-utility of in-house 3Dp technologies and practical cost-saving methods. The authors' results underscore the need for broad exposure for currently practicing attendings and trainees in 3Dp practices and other evolving technologies.

The value of microvascular breast reconstruction: Cost equivalence of TRAM and DIEP flaps implications in the era of CMS reforms.

BACKGROUND: Recent CMS billing changes have raised concerns about insurance coverage for deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. This study compared the costs and utilization of transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM), DIEP, and latissimus dorsi (LD) flaps in breast reconstruction. METHOD: The study utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to identify female patients who underwent DIEP, TRAM, and LD flap procedures from 2016 to 2019. Key data such as patient demographics, length of stay, complications, and costs (adjusted to 2021 USD) were analyzed, focusing on differences across the flap types. RESULTS: A total of 17,770 weighted patient encounters were identified, with the median age being 51. The majority underwent DIEP flaps (73.5%), followed by TRAM (14.2%) and LD (12.1%) flaps. The findings revealed that DIEP and TRAM flaps had a similar length of stay (LOS), while LD flaps typically had a shorter LOS. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio were also comparable between DIEP and TRAM flaps, whereas LD flaps were significantly less expensive. Factors such as income quartile, primary payer of hospitalization, and geographic region significantly influenced flap choice. CONCLUSION: The study's results appear to contradict the prevailing notion that TRAM flaps are more cost-effective than DIEP flaps. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio and hospital stays associated with TRAM and DIEP flaps were found to be similar. These findings suggest that changes in the insurance landscape, which may limit the use of DIEP flaps, could undermine patient autonomy while not necessarily reducing healthcare costs. Such policy shifts could favor less costly options like the LD flap, potentially altering the landscape of microvascular breast reconstruction.

Continuing Insurance Coverage for Flap-Based Breast Reconstruction: Is There a Reservation Cost Related to a Woman's Abdominal Flap Choice?

BACKGROUND: The recent proposed alterations to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regulations, although subsequently reversed on August 21, 2023, have engendered persistent concerns regarding the impact of insurance policies on breast reconstruction procedures coverage. This study aimed to identify factors that would influence women's preferences regarding autologous breast reconstruction to better understand the possible consequences of these coverage changes. METHODS: A survey of adult women in the United States was conducted via Amazon Mechanical Turk to assess patient preferences for breast reconstruction options, specifically deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap surgery. The Cochrane-Armitage test evaluated trends in flap preferences concerning incremental out-of-pocket payment increases. RESULTS: Of 500 total responses, 485 were completed and correctly answered a verification question to ensure adequate attention to the survey, with respondents having a median (interquartile range) age of 26 (25-39) years. When presented with the advantages and disadvantages of DIEP versus TRAM flaps, 78% of respondents preferred DIEP; however, as DIEP's out-of-pocket price incrementally rose, more respondents favored the cheaper TRAM option, with $3804 being the "indifference point" where preferences for both procedures converged (P < 0.001). Notably, respondents with a personal history of breast reconstruction showed a higher preference for DIEP, even at a $10,000 out-of-pocket cost (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-pocket cost can significantly influence women's choices for breast reconstruction. These findings encourage a reevaluation of emergent insurance practices that could potentially increase out-of-pocket costs associated with DIEP flaps, to prevent cost from decreasing equitable patient access to most current reconstructive options.

Racial and ethnic representation in united states plastic surgery clinical trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

In 1993, the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act mandated increasing minority and women enrollment in clinical trials (CTs). This study aimed to investigate trends in race and ethnicity enrollment and reporting in US plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) CT. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review was performed. All CTs in PRS from 2012 to 2022 were included. To assess racial and ethnic representation within CTs, a random-effects meta-analysis of proportion was conducted to pool the prevalence of the binomial data. RESULTS: A total of 3609 studies were initially identified in the search strategy, with 154 later classified as CTs in PRS. Only 36 met the eligibility criteria for reporting race and ethnicity and were included in the analysis. A total of 7281 participants were included: 446 (6.1%) males and 6835 (93.9%) females. From CTs that correctly reported race, the pooled prevalence of races were as follows: Whites 78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 73-82%), Black or African Americans 8% (95% CI 5-11%), Asians 1% (95% CI <1-2%), American Indians <1% (95% CI <1-<1%), and Pacific Islanders <1% (95% CI <1-<1%). From the studies that reported ethnicity correctly, the pooled prevalence of Hispanics was 7% (95% CI 5-9%), and Non-Hispanics was 12% (<1-38%). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in minority representation were present among PRS CTs. This suggests clear limitations in generalizing PRS CT results to the population. Efforts to decrease the gap in minority enrollment and accurately report race and ethnicity are needed in all fields, including plastic surgery.

The impact of race and ethnicity in outpatient breast reconstruction decision-making and postoperative outcomes: A propensity score-matched NSQIP analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent literature has established outpatient breast reconstruction (BR) to be a safe alternative to inpatient BR. However, the impact of race and ethnicity on BR patient decision-making and postsurgical outcomes remains unexplored. This study aims to assess the impact of race and ethnicity on outpatient BR timing and postoperative complication rates. METHODS: The 2013-2020 ACS-NSQIP database was utilized to identify women undergoing outpatient BR. Propensity score-matched analysis was conducted to generate balanced cohorts based on race and ethnicity. t-tests and Fisher's exact tests were used to assess group differences. Logistic regressions were modeled to evaluate differences in complications between groups. RESULTS: A total of 63,526 patients underwent outpatient BR. After propensity score matching, 7664 patients and 3948 patients were included in the race and ethnicity-based analysis, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in the timing of BR patients received across cohorts. NW patients had lower rates of immediate BR (IBR) compared with White patients (47% vs. 53%, p < 0.001), and this also was seen in Hispanic patients (97% vs. 3%, p = 0.018). Subsequently, there were higher rates of delayed BR (DBR) in the NW cohort (55% vs. 45%, p < 0.001) and in the Hispanic cohort (95% vs. 5%, p = 0.018). There were no significant differences in the rates of 30-day postoperative complications across cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, our findings suggest that minority patients are more likely to undergo DBR than nonminority patients. However, there were no differences in 30-day postoperative outcomes across race or ethnicity. Future studies to elucidate patients' decision-making process in choosing optimal BR types and timing are necessary to better understand the impact of the observed differences in patient care.

Utilization of patient-reported outcome measures in plastic surgery clinical trials: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have evolved to validated questionnaires assessing health-related quality of life. This systematic review evaluates the utilization of PROs in United States plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) clinical trials (CTs). METHODS: A medical librarian conducted a search strategy for PRS CTs from 2012 to 2022. CTs were identified and assessed for PRO utilization. Summary statistics were performed, and Fisher's exact test was used for subgroup analysis. RESULTS: Of the 3609 studies initially identified, 154 were PRS CTs. Approximately half (80 studies) employed PROs, encompassing 13,190 participants, 95% (12,229) of whom were female. Among the CTs, 37 (48%) were in the field of reconstruction, while 25 (32%) were cosmetic. Pain (35%) and patient satisfaction (24%) were the most common primary outcomes. Validated PROs were the main outcome in 61% of these trials, with the visual analog scale (19%) and BREAST-Q (15%) as the top instruments. Funding was primarily private (34%) or not reported (49%). No significant trend in validated PRO usage was observed over the examined decade. CONCLUSIONS: The use of PROs is relevant for healthcare delivery and improvement as they provide insight into the efficacy of treatments from a patient-centered viewpoint. PROs are reported in just over half of PRS CTs, and within those CTs, the use of validated questionnaires is inconsistent. Therefore, emerging CTs should strive to incorporate PRO measures and utilize the existing validated tools to assess novel interventions and ensure that the data reported is objective.

Impact of sternal notch-to-nipple distance and resection weight asymmetry on complication rates and patient reported outcomes in reduction mammaplasty.

While there are numerous predictive models for estimating resection weight, their accuracy may not be strong. Through institutional data of patients who received reduction mammaplasty, this study demonstrates that preoperative sternal notch-to-nipple distance is not an optimal predictive factor for differences in final resection weight, complication rates, and patient reported outcomes. Our results showed that there is a weak correlation between preoperative sternal notch to nipple asymmetry and final resection weight asymmetry. Additionally, significant breast asymmetry is not tied to an increase in complication rates or poorer patient reported outcomes. There is an indication to reconsider the use of such absolute measures for determining who may benefit from reduction mammaplasty.

The impact of metabolic syndrome in breast reconstruction decision-making and postoperative outcomes: A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a cluster of cardiometabolic abnormalities including hypertension, obesity, insulin resistance, and dyslipidemia. The safety profiles of patients with MetS undergoing breast reconstruction remain underreported. This study aims to evaluate the impact of MetS on the BR decision-making process and postoperative complication rates. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP database was utilized to identify women who underwent BR between 2012 and 2021. Baseline characteristics were compared based on the presence of MetS, defined as patients receiving medical treatment for diabetes mellitus and hypertension, with a body mass index greater than 30 kg/m2. Group differences were assessed using t tests and Fisher's exact tests. Multivariate logistic regression models evaluated postoperative complications between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 160,115 patients underwent BR. A total of 4570 had a diagnosis of MetS compared to 155,545 without MetS. No statistically significant differences were observed in the type of BR patients received across cohorts. Logistic regression models demonstrated a higher likelihood of postoperative wound complications (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.399, 3.478; p = 0.001), and readmission rates (OR 2.045; 95% CI 1.337, 3.128; p = 0.001) in the MetS group compared to the non-MetS patients. No significant differences were identified in other postoperative complications between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MetS appear to have an increased risk of postoperative wound complications and readmission after breast reconstruction. The synergistic effects of these comorbidities on postoperative outcomes underscore the importance of addressing MetS as a holistic condition and considering choosing Delayed breast reconstruction over Immediate Breast Reconstruction in this population. Thus, integrating MetS management and patient counseling at various stages of BR may improve outcomes and facilitate patient decision-making.

Incidental Bystander or Essential Culprit: A Systematic Review of Bacterial Significance in the Pathogenesis of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma.

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a distinct subtype of T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma that arises in the context of prolonged exposure to textured breast implants. The intent of this manuscript is to explore whether the bacterial presence in biofilms on these implants is a mere incidental finding or plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of BIA-ALCL. Our goal is to delineate the extent of bacterial involvement, offering insights into potential underlying mechanisms, and establishing future research priorities aimed at resolving the remaining uncertainties surrounding this complex association. A comprehensive systematic review of several databases was performed. The search strategy was designed and conducted by an experienced librarian using controlled vocabulary with keywords. The electronic search identified 442 publications. After evaluation, six studies from 2015 to 2021 were included, encompassing 201 female patients aged 23 to 75. The diagnosis span post-implantation ranged from 53 to 135.6 months. Studies consistently found bacteria near breast implants in both BIA-ALCL cases and controls, with varied microbial findings. Both BIA-ALCL cases and controls exhibited the presence of specific bacteria, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella oxytoca, Staphylococcus aureus, and Ralstonia spp., without any statistically significant differences between groups. The use of antiseptic and antimicrobial agents during implant insertion did not demonstrate any impact on reducing or altering the risk of developing BIA-ALCL. Our systematic review reveals that the current evidence is inadequate to link bacterial etiology as a central factor in the development of BIA-ALCL. The limitations in the existing data prevent a complete dismissal of the role of biofilms in its pathogenesis. The observed gap in knowledge underscores the need for more focused and comprehensive research, which should be structured in a multi-faceted approach. Initially, this involves the utilization of sophisticated genomic and proteomic methods. Following this, it is crucial to delve into the study of immunological reactions specifically induced by biofilms. Finally, this research should incorporate extended observational studies, meticulously tracking the evolution of biofilm development and its correlation with the emergence of BIA-ALCL. In light of the inconclusive nature of current findings, further investigation is not only justified but urgently needed to clarify these unresolved issues.