RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) often require complex surgical reconstruction. This retrospective, cross-sectional study compares financial factors influencing HNC and breast cancer (BC) care to examine care disparities. METHODS: Pricing data from 2012 to 2021 was abstracted from the CMS Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool. Nonprofit and research support was quantified by searching the NIH, IRS, and GuideStar databases. New York State Department of Health data from 2015 to 2019 was analyzed to compare costs, charges, and payer mix. RESULTS: HNC reconstructive procedures reimburse lower than comparable breast procedures (p < 0.05). Nonprofit and research support for HNC is disproportionately low relative to disease burden. Patients hospitalized for HNC surgical procedures generated higher costs and lower charges than patients with BC (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Comparatively low procedure reimbursement, low nonprofit support, and high cost of care for patients with HNC relative to patients with BC may contribute to care disparities for patients with HNC.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Because of the association of textured breast implants with breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, anatomically shaped breast implants, which rely on a textured surface to maintain rotational stability, have been recalled from the market. The dearth of anatomically shaped implants on the market reflects a need for novel breast implant technology, which has been traditionally developed by commercial breast implant manufacturers due to the complexities of implant manufacturing. To increase the accessibility of preclinical breast implant research, miniature breast implants made from polydimethylsiloxane were designed and fabricated for high throughput and low-cost prototyping and in vivo testing of both smooth and textured implants in a laboratory setting. METHODS: Two-piece negative molds measuring 2 × 1 cm were constructed in Fusion360 and 3D printed in Polysmooth filament. Textured molds were painted with a mixture of an epoxy and fine sugar or granular salt to create textured surfaces, while molds for smooth implants were smoothed using ethanol spray. Molds were injected with polydimethylsiloxane and cured for 12 hours at 37°C. The surface topography of laboratory-made implants and commercial textured and smooth implant shells was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy and implants were evaluated in vivo in an immunocompetent rodent model. RESULTS: Implants retained the original dome shape of the 3D-printed molds. Qualitative assessment of scanning electron microscopy images demonstrated similar surface topography between laboratory-made and commercial smooth and textured implants. There was no statistical difference in the diameter or density of the surface indentations of the Allergan's textured implant compared with laboratory-made textured implants ( P > 0.05). Finally, the surface topography and thickness of laboratory-made implant capsules were similar to previously published data using industry made miniature silicone devices implanted in rats. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a low-cost, highly customizable approach to fabricate miniature smooth and textured breast implant prototypes for in vivo studies. The accessibility of this implant fabrication strategy allows nonindustry investigators to develop novel implant designs more rapidly for preclinical investigation.
