# Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction Referrals

## TL;DR

This study finds racial and socioeconomic disparities in referrals for complex abdominal wall surgery, with in-state patients more likely to be Black and receive less invasive procedures.

## Contribution

The study reveals racial disparities in open abdominal wall reconstruction referrals, highlighting inequities in access to tertiary care.

## Key findings

- In-state patients were more likely to be Black and undergo minimally invasive procedures compared to out-of-state patients.
- In-state patients had fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower readmission rates than out-of-state patients.
- Demographics and outcomes were similar for in-state and out-of-state patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery.

## Abstract

Background: Health disparities are pervasive in surgical care. Particularly racial and socioeconomic inequalities have been demonstrated in emergency general surgery outcomes, but less so in elective abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR). The goal of this study was to evaluate the disparities in referrals to a tertiary hernia center.

Methods: A prospectively maintained hernia database was queried for patients who underwent open ventral hernia (OVHR) or minimally invasive surgical (MISR) repair from 2011 to 2022 with complete insurance and address information. Patients were divided by home address into in-state (IS) and out-of-state (OOS) referrals as well as by operative technique. Demographic data and outcomes were compared. Standard and inferential statistical analyses were performed.

Results: Of 554 patients, most were IS (59.0%); 334 underwent OVHR, and 220 underwent MISR. IS patients were more likely to undergo MISR (OVHR: 45.6% vs. 81.5%, laparoscopic: 38.2% vs. 14.1%, robotic: 16.2% vs. 4.4%; p < 0.001) when compared to OOS referrals. Of OVHR patients, 44.6% were IS and 55.4% were OOS. Patients’ average age and BMI, sex, ASA score, and insurance payer were similar between IS and OOS groups. IS patients were more often Black (White: 77.9% vs. 93.5%, Black: 16.8% vs. 4.3%; p < 0.001). IS patients had more smokers (12.1% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.001), fewer recurrent hernias (45.0% vs. 69.7%; p < 0.001), and smaller defects (155.7 ± 142.2 vs. 256.4 ± 202.9 cm2; p < 0.001). Wound class, mesh type, and rate of fascial closure were similar, but IS patients underwent fewer panniculectomies (13.4% vs. 34.1%; p < 0.001), component separations (26.2% vs. 51.4%; p < 0.001), received smaller mesh (744.2 ± 495.6 vs. 975.7 ± 442.3 cm2; p < 0.001), and had shorter length-of-stay (4.8 ± 2.0 vs. 7.0 ± 5.5 days; p < 0.001). There was no difference in wound breakdown, seroma requiring intervention, hematoma, mesh infection, or recurrence; however, IS patients had decreased wound infections (2.0% vs. 8.6%; p = 0.009), overall wound complications (11.4% vs. 21.1%; p = 0.016), readmissions (2.7% vs. 13.0%; p = 0.001), and reoperations (3.4% vs. 11.4%; p = 0.007). Of MISR patients, 80.9% were IS and 19.1% were OOS. In contrast to OVHR, MISR IS and OOS patients had similar demographics, preoperative characteristics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes.

Conclusion: Although there were no differences in referred patients for MISR, this study demonstrates the racial disparities that exist among our IS and OOS complex, open AWR patients. Awareness of these disparities can help clinicians work towards equitable access to care and equal referrals to tertiary hernia centers.