Market landscape and insurer-provider integration: the case of ambulatory surgery centers.

Insurer-provider integration is a new form of vertical integration, with increasing prominence in health care markets. While there are potential benefits from tighter alignment between providers and payers, risks of perverse impacts on health care markets loom large. Yet, little is known about this new wave of consolidation, which limits options for policy or regulatory responses. We focus on a dominant insurer's acquisitions of ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) to document the growth and geographic spread of these ownership events. We found that a diverse swathe of the United States has experienced an insurer-led ASC takeover. The acquisitions are also more frequently in areas where the insurer holds a higher enrollee market share at baseline, although a linear prediction of the likelihood of ASC acquisition shows a more nuanced picture.

Effect of Surgery Setting for Outpatient Shoulder Procedures on Early Postoperative Complications in a Military Population.

BACKGROUND: There has been a recent push to transition procedures previously performed at hospital-based outpatient surgical departments (HOPDs) to ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). However, limited data regarding differences in early postoperative complications and care utilization (e.g., emergency department visits and unplanned admissions) may drive increased overall costs or worse outcomes. PURPOSE: /Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to examine differences in early 90-day adverse outcomes and postoperative emergency department visits associated with shoulder surgeries excluding arthroplasties that were performed in HOPDs and ASCs in a closed military health care system. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in outcomes between treatment settings. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the records for 1,748 elective shoulder surgeries from 2015 to 2020. Patients were considered as one of two cohorts depending on whether they underwent surgery in an ASC or HOPD setting. We evaluated groups for differences incomplexity, surgical time, and medical risk. Outcome measures were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions, and complications within the first 90 days after surgery. RESULTS: There was no difference in 90-day postoperative emergency department visits between procedures performed at HOPDs (n = 606) and ASCs (n = 1142). There was a slight increase in rate of unplanned hospital admission within 90 days after surgery in the HOPD cohort, most commonly for pain or overnight observation. The surgical time was significantly shorter (105 vs 119 minutes, p <0.01) at the ASC, but there was no difference in case complexity between the cohorts (p = 0.28). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that in appropriate patients, surgery in ASCs can be safely leveraged for its costs savings, efficiency, patient satisfaction, decreases in operative time, and potentially decreased resource utilization both during surgery and in the early postoperative period.

The AAHKS Clinical Research Award: Extended Postoperative Oral Tranexamic Acid in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative tranexamic acid (TXA) use with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is widely accepted today. Recently, a few international groups have published on the safety and outcomes of extending TXA use in the postoperative period. Through a double-blinded, randomized control trial (RCT), we aimed to investigate the safety and clinical efficacy of extended postoperative oral TXA use in TKA performed in an American, free-standing ambulatory surgery center (ASC). METHODS: Based on a power analysis, 40 patients undergoing primary TKA were randomized into 2 groups: extended oral TXA versus placebo. Both groups received a standard 1g intravenous TXA dose prior to incision and at the time of closure. The extended TXA group received an additional 1.95 g oral TXA dose following ambulation the day of surgery, plus on postoperative days 1,2, and 3. Patients who had a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or cancer were excluded. All patients received 81 mg of aspirin twice daily for VTE prophylaxis. Patients were followed on postoperative day 3 and weeks 2 and 6. Paired t-tests determined statistical significance. RESULTS: Extended TXA patients showed significantly increased knee flexion at 6 weeks (116.05 versus 106.5, P = .0308), improved VAS at 2 (2.5 versus 3.85, P = .039) and 6 weeks (1.35 versus 2.8, P = .011), and superior KOOS JR at 2 (66.87 versus 60.63, P = .03) and 6 weeks (73.33 versus 62.47, P = .0019) compared to placebo patients. No significant differences were found for changes in hemoglobin levels at any time points. No significant differences were found at 12 weeks for any clinical endpoints. No adverse events were noted in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to placebo, the extended use of oral TXA in the postoperative period may safely result in improved motion, pain, and functional scores. Further investigation into 1-to-2-year outcomes, as well as the duration and dose of postoperative TXA use is warranted.

Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity: Ensuring Sustained Nursing Knowledge in a High-Volume Outpatient Surgery Center.

PURPOSE: Local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) is a low-frequency, high-risk event that can occur within minutes of a patient receiving a local anesthetic. The goals of this project were to standardize LAST care management across an academic medical center and sustain an improvement in nurses' knowledge of how to recognize signs and symptoms of LAST and how to competently manage a LAST scenario. DESIGN: We used a quantitative design to accomplish the goals of the project. METHODS: Our interdisciplinary team developed a clinical practice guideline based on the LAST Checklist published by the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, and used a simulation scaffolded by multimodal education and system changes to ensure sustained knowledge. We measured improvement using a graded knowledge assessment as well as qualitative feedback. FINDINGS: Scores on the assessment increased from 4.76 to 6.34 (out of seven points) following the intervention and remained significantly higher than the baseline 9 months after the educational intervention (9-month score = 6.19, t = 2.99, P = .004). Nurses reported feeling more confident and knowledgeable following the intervention and requested to have regular sessions of the simulation. To sustain improvements, we developed a computer-based learning module. The module and simulation were integrated into nursing orientation and an annual competency. CONCLUSIONS: While standardizing LAST care in accordance with evidence-based guidance is critical to patient safety due to its infrequent occurrence, nurses should consider implementing simulation supplemented with multimodal education and system changes to ensure sustained knowledge.

Advanced Concepts in Outpatient Joint Arthroplasty.

As the adoption and utilization of outpatient total joint arthroplasty continues to grow, key developments have enabled surgeons to safely and effectively perform these surgeries while increasing patient satisfaction and operating room efficiency. Here, the authors will discuss the evidence-based principles that have guided this paradigm shift in joint arthroplasty surgery, as well as practical methods for selecting appropriate candidates and optimizing perioperative care. There will be 5 core efficiency principles reviewed that can be used to improve organizational management, streamline workflow, and overcome barriers in the ambulatory surgery center. Finally, future directions in outpatient surgery at the ASC, including the merits of implementing robot assistance and computer navigation, as well as expanding indications for revision surgeries, will be debated.

A Prospective Multicenter Standard of Care Study of Outpatient Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy.

A global shift is occurring as hospital procedures move to ambulatory surgical settings. Surgeons have performed outpatient sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in bariatric surgery since 2010. However, prospective trials are needed to ensure its safety before widespread adoption. PURPOSE: The study aimed to present a comprehensive report on the prospective data collection of 30-day outcomes of outpatient primary laparoscopic SG (LSG). This trial seeks to assess whether outpatient LSG is non-inferior to hospital-based surgery in selected patients who meet the outpatient surgery criteria set by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is funded by the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons and has been approved by the Advarra Institutional Review Board (Pro00055990). Cognizant of the necessity for a prospective approach, data collection commenced after patients underwent primary LSG procedures, spanning from August 2021 to September 2022, at six medical centers across the USA. Data centralization was facilitated through ArborMetrix. Each center has its own enhanced recovery protocols, and no attempt was made to standardize the protocols. RESULTS: The analysis included 365 patients with a mean preoperative BMI of 43.7 ± 5.7 kg/m2. Rates for 30-day complications, reoperations, readmissions, emergency department visits, and urgent care visits were low: 1.6%, .5%, .2%, .2%, and 0%, respectively. Two patients (0.5%) experienced grade IIIb complications. There were no mortalities or leaks reported. CONCLUSION: The prospective cohort study suggests that same-day discharge following LSG seems safe in highly selected patients at experienced US centers.

Growing utilization of ambulatory spine surgery in Medicare patients from 2010-2021.

Background: There is growing interest in transitioning various surgical procedures to the outpatient care setting. However, for Medicare patients, the site of service for surgical procedures is influenced by regulations within the Inpatient and Outpatient Prospective Payment Systems. The purpose of this study is to quantify changes in utilization of outpatient spine surgery within the Medicare population, as well as to determine changes in outpatient volume after removal of a procedure from the "inpatient-only" list. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of Medicare billing database information for selected spine procedures included in the Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary (PSPS) public use files from 2010-2021. These files include aggregated data from Medicare Part B fee-for-service claims, published yearly. Procedures from Healthcare Common Procedural Coding System (HCPCS) code ranges 22010-22899 and 62380-63103 were selected for analysis, limited to surgical services delivered in the inpatient, hospital outpatient department (HOPD), and ambulatory surgical center (ASC) settings. For each HCPCS code included, estimates of the total number of services and corresponding changes in volume were calculated. Results: Within the range of codes included in the study, the total number of outpatient spine procedures rose approximately 193% from 2010 to 2021, with compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for outpatient procedures per year of 9.9% for HOPDs and 15.7% for ASCs (-2.2% for inpatient procedures). Within this period, the ASC list grew from 12 procedures to 58 procedures. In 2021, the highest volume ASC procedure was HCPCS 63047, at approximately 4970 procedures. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a trend of increasing utilization of HOPDs and ASCs for spine procedures among Medicare beneficiaries from 2010 to 2021. Though HOPDs are currently more widely utilized, the ongoing additions of spine procedures to the ASC covered procedures list may shift this balance.

Increasing the Volume of Outpatient Total Joint Arthroplasty Procedures: An Evaluation of a Novel Rapid Recovery Pathway Program Within an Academic Medical Center.

Background: There has been a national trend toward shifting joint arthroplasty procedures to the outpatient setting. These cases are often performed in freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), which are often not accessible to surgeons within academic practices. Purposes: We sought to investigate a novel rapid recovery program used to transition arthroplasty patients to an outpatient-based care system within an academic medical center. Methods: All patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty between November 2019 and April 2021 were retrospectively evaluated for their eligibility for a rapid recovery pathway through the Extended Stay Unit (ESU) based on clinical and social criteria. Once admitted, patients were evaluated for whether they were discharged from the unit or if hospital admission was necessary. Results: Out of the 444 patients deemed candidates for the rapid recovery program, 188 patients were admitted to the ESU (42.3%); 18 (9.6%) required inpatient hospital admission, with the majority of these due to failing physical therapy (16; 88.9%). Of the ESU patients who were successfully discharged home, 55 (32.4%) were discharged on postoperative day (POD) 0 and 115 (67.6%) on POD 1 (<23 hours). Conclusion: As total joint arthroplasties shift toward the outpatient setting, surgeons in academic institutions must employ strategies to increase their volume of patient candidates for outpatient procedures. Our retrospective study of prospectively collected data suggests the feasibility of creating a separate rapid recovery unit within the hospital that can be an effective method by which to eventually transition to the ASC setting.

Joint Replacement Technology in the Ambulatory Surgery Center: Current and Future Applications.

Total joint replacement (TJR) surgery in the ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) has grown significantly over the past several years, along with the ability to improve the value of care. Standardization of high-quality, perioperative care is pivotal to the success of a TJR ASC program. As surgeons are experiencing increasing overhead with decreasing reimbursement, technology integration can provide major advantages. In this article, we will therefore highlight several examples of technologies that are changing the field and improving care in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings.

Medicare procedural costs in ambulatory surgery centers versus hospital outpatient departments for spine surgeries.

OBJECTIVE: Multiple studies have demonstrated the safety of outpatient spine surgery, with reports of equivalent to improved patient outcomes compared with inpatient procedures. This has resulted in the increased use of outpatient surgery over time. However, there remains a paucity of literature evaluating the difference in costs between ambulatory surgery center (ASC)- and hospital outpatient department (HOPD)-based procedures for Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: Publicly available data from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were accessed via the Medicare Procedure Price Lookup tool. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify spine-specific procedures approved for the outpatient setting by CMS. Procedures were grouped into decompression (cervical, thoracic, and lumbar), fusion/instrumentation (cervical, lumbar, and sacroiliac), and kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty cohorts, as well as an overall cohort. Data regarding total costs, facility fees, surgeon reimbursement, Medicare payments, and patient copayments were extracted for each procedure. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and standard deviations. Differences between ASC- and HOPD-associated costs were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Twenty-one individual CPT codes approved by Medicare for the ASC and/or HOPD setting were identified. Decompression procedures were associated with a significantly lower total cost ($4183 ± $411.07 vs $7583.67 ± $410.89, p < 0.001), facility fees ($2998 ± $0 vs $6397 ± $0, p < 0.001), Medicare payments ($3345.75 ± $328.80 vs $6064.75 ± $328.80, p < 0.001), and patient payments ($835.58 ± $82.13 vs $1515.58 ± $82.13, p < 0.001) in ASCs compared with HOPDs. Fusion/instrumentation procedures had significantly lower facility fees ($10,436.6 ± $2347.51 vs $14,161 ± $2147.07, p = 0.044) and Medicare payments ($9501.2 ± $1732.42 vs $13,757 ± $2037.58, p = 0.009) in ASCs, as well as a trend toward lower total costs ($11,876.8 ± $2165.22 vs $15,601.2 ± $2016.06, p = 0.076). Patient payments in the HOPD setting were significantly lower in the fusion/instrumentation cohort ($1843.6 ± $73.42 vs $2374.4 ± $433.48, p = 0.009). In the kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty cohort, there was no statistically significant difference between ASCs and HOPDs, despite lower overall costs in the ASC for all variables. Surgeon fees were the same regardless of setting for all procedures (p > 0.99). When combining decompression, fusion/instrumentation, and kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty CPT codes into a single cohort, ASC setting was associated with significant cost savings in total cost, facility fees, Medicare payments, and patient payments. CONCLUSIONS: In general, performing spine surgeries in ASCs is associated with cost savings compared with HOPDs. This was demonstrated for decompression and fusion/instrumentation, and kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty Medicare-approved outpatient procedures.

Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Outpatient Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the Ambulatory Surgery Center: A Matched-Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Spinal anesthesia is the predominant regimen in outpatient total joint arthroplasty (TJA), but induction often is unsuccessful, unobtainable, or against patient preference. We compared outcomes of same-day discharge (SDD) TJA with spinal versus general anesthesia in a free-standing ambulatory surgery center (ASC). METHODS: We took 105 general anesthesia TJA and one-to-one nearest-neighbor matched them to 105 spinal anesthesia TJA over 7 years at 1 ASC. The rate of successful SDD, minutes to discharge, postoperative pain and nausea, and 90-day complications were compared. Postanesthesia care unit outcomes were additionally stratified by spinal anesthetic (mepivacaine versus bupivacaine). RESULTS: All spinal anesthetic patients underwent SDD compared with 103 (98%) general anesthetic patients (P = .498). Mepivacaine spinal anesthesia patients spent the fewest minutes in postanesthesia care unit prior to discharge from the facility (206), followed by general anesthesia (227), and bupivacaine spinal anesthesia (291; P < .001). General anesthesia patients had the highest levels of pain at 1 hour (5.2 versus 1.5 versus 1.5) and 2 hours (3.2 versus 2.0 versus 1.3) postoperatively, and rates of nausea (48 versus 22 versus 28%) compared with mepivacaine and bupivacaine spinal anesthesia, respectively. The 90-day complications (6 versus 7), admissions (1 versus 3), and reoperations (5 versus 2) were similar among spinal and general anesthesia, respectively (P ≥ .445). CONCLUSIONS: Both spinal and general anesthesia led to reliable SDD with similar 90-day complication rates. General anesthesia facilitated faster discharge from the ASC compared with bupivacaine spinal anesthesia but led to higher levels of pain and incidence of nausea postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, Retrospective Cohort Comparison.

Epidemiology of facial skin cancers managed in a French ambulatory surgical center.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 80,000 cases of skin cancer are diagnosed annually in France. The management of these cancers can occur in both university hospital centers and ambulatory surgery centers. Limited data exist regarding the epidemiology of cutaneous cancers treated through ambulatory surgery centers. The objective of our study is to describe the epidemiological characteristics of cutaneous cancers managed in a tertiary ambulatory surgery center. METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-center observational study. The included patients were those who underwent surgical excision of one or more skin cancers within the maxillofacial department of a tertiary ambulatory surgery center. Clinical, therapeutic, histopathological, and follow-up data (additional surgery if margins were not clear, progression, recurrence, second cancer…) were collected. RESULTS: Among the n = 1931 patients operated for a head and neck skin tumor from September 2018 to July 2022, n = 426 (22 %) were diagnosed with cancer upon histological analysis. The median age was 76 years (31-100), with a male-to-female ratio of 1/1. The most frequent locations were the nose (23 %) and cheek (20 %). Ten percent of patients had dual-site skin cancer at initial diagnosis. The most common histological types were basal cell carcinoma (77 %) and squamous cell carcinoma (18 %). Surgical treatment primarily consisted of "excision-reconstruction with local flap" (51 %) or "excision-suture" (34 %). Resection margins were mostly clear (65 %), and only six patients (2 %) experienced local recurrence or progression during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Skin cancers are prevalent in ambulatory practice. Surgical treatment allows for effective control of the cancer. Photoprotection, particularly in immunocompromised patients, remains crucial for prevention.

Surgical Setting in Achilles Tendon Repair: How Does It Relate to Costs and Complications?

Background: Primary Achilles tendon repair (ATR) can be performed in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) or hospitals. We compared costs and complication rates of ATR performed in these settings. Methods: We retrospectively queried the electronic medical record of our academic health system and identified 97 adults who underwent primary ATR from 2015 to 2021. Variables were compared between patients treated at ASCs vs those treated in hospitals. We compared continuous variables with Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and categorical variables with χ2 tests. We used an α of 0.05. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine associations between surgical setting and costs. Linear regression was performed between each charge subtype and total cost to identify which charge subtypes were most associated with total cost. Results: Patients who underwent ATR in hospitals had a higher rate of unanticipated postoperative hospital admission (13%) than those treated in ASCs (0%) (P = .01). We found no differences with regard to postoperative complications, emergency department visits, readmission, rerupture, reoperation/revision, or death. Patients treated in hospitals had a higher mean (±SD) implant cost ($664 ± $810) than those treated in ASCs ($175 ± $585) (P < .01). We found no differences between settings with regard to total cost, supply costs, operating room charges, or anesthesia charges. Higher implant cost was associated with hospital setting (odds ratio = 16 [95% CI: 1.7-157]) and body mass index > 25 (odds ratio = 1.2 [95% CI: 1.0-1.5]). Operating room costs were strongly correlated with total costs (R2 = .94). Conclusion: The overall cost and complication rate of ATRs were not significantly different between ASCs and hospitals. ATRs performed in hospitals had higher implant costs and higher rates of postoperative admission than those performed in ASCs. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

The Differential Effect of COVID on Total Joint Arthroplasty Between Hospital and Ambulatory Surgery Centers/Hospital Outpatient Departments: A Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative Analysis.

Background: Coronavirus disease (COVID) created unprecedented challenges, especially for high-volume elective subspecialties like total joint arthroplasty. Limited inpatient capacity and resource conservation led to new outpatient selection criteria and site of service changes. As a Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Quality Collaborative Initiative quality project, demographic changes, complications, and differential effects on inpatient vs outpatient centers pre- and post-COVID were analyzed. Methods: The registry identified all total joint arthroplasty at hospitals and ASCs/HOPDs between 07/2019-12/2019 and 07/2020-12/2020. These intervals represented pre-COVID and post-COVID elective surgery shutdowns. Case volumes, demographics, and 90-day complications were compared. Results: Comparing 2020 to 2019, hospital volumes decreased (-9% total hip arthroplasty [THA], -17% total knee arthroplasty [TKA]), and ambulatory surgery center (ASC)/hospital outpatient department (HOPD) increased (+84% THA, +125% TKA). Entering 2020, ASC/HOPD patients were older (P = .0031, P < .0001: THA, TKA), had more American Society of Anesthesiologists score 3-4 (P = .0105, P = .0021), fewer attended joint class (P < .0001, P < .0001), and more hips were women (P = .023). Hospital patients had higher preoperative pain scores (P = .0117, P < .0001; THA, TKA), less joint education attendance (P < .0001, P < .0001), younger TKAs (P = .0169), and more American Society of Anesthesiologists score 3-4 (0.0009). After propensity matching, there were no significant differences between site of service for 90-day fractures, deep vein thromboses or pulmonary embolisms, infection, or hip dislocations. Hospital THAs had higher readmissions (P = .0003) and TKAs had higher 30-day emergency department visits (P = .005). ASC/HOPD patients were prescribed higher oral morphine equivalents (P < .0001, P < .0001; THA, TKA). Conclusions: COVID's elective surgery shutdown caused a dramatic site of service shift. Traditional preoperative education was negatively impacted, and older and sicker patients became outpatients. But short-term complications were not increased in ASCs/HOPDs. These site of service and associated patient demographic changes may be safely sustained.

Biportal Endoscopic Approach for Lumbar Degenerative Disease in the Ambulatory Outpatient vs Inpatient Setting: A Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Biportal spinal endoscopy is increasingly utilized for lumbar disc herniations and lumbar stenosis. The objective was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of the technique in the outpatient vs inpatient setting. METHODS: This is a comparative study of consecutive patients who underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution. Demographics, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Statistics were calculated among treatment groups using unpaired t test and χ 2 analysis where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were included, 58 (69.0%) as outpatient, 26 (31.0%) as inpatient. Mean follow-up was 7.5 months. Statistically significant differences in age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and Charleston Comorbidity Index scores were reported between cohorts, with younger and healthier patients undergoing outpatient surgery (P < 0.0001). Outpatients were more likely to have discectomies while inpatients were more likely to have decompressions for stenosis. No significant differences in postoperative complications were found between groups.Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain scores and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P < 0.001). Outpatients had significantly lower postoperative VAS back pain (P = 0.001) and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.004) at 5-8 weeks compared with inpatients, but there was no significant difference for VAS leg pain scores at all time points between the cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Early results demonstrate that biportal spinal endoscopy can safely and effectively be performed in both inpatient and outpatient settings. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Outpatient biportal spinal endoscopy can be performed successfully in well selected patients, which may reduce the financial burden of spine surgery to the U.S. healthcare system.

Ablation of atrial fibrillation in an ambulatory outpatient setting.

Background: The safety of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in an ambulatory outpatient center has not previously been reported. Objective: The aim of this study is to report the feasibility and safety of AF ablation in an ambulatory setting. Methods: We identified all AF ablations performed at the Alaska Heart and Vascular Institute's ambulatory center since program initiation to current day using billing records. Procedural complications, postoperative utilization of hospital services, and emergency room (ER) utilization were captured by chart review. Results: A total of 476 patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation in the ambulatory setting over a 6.3-year period. Patients' average age was 58 ± 9.3 years, body mass index was 32.9 kg/m2, and the CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category) score was 1.7. For 85%, this was the first AF ablation, and 55% had paroxysmal AF. Cryoablation was used in 85%. A combined primary safety outcome capturing potentially unstable perioperative safety events occurred in 1.5% of patients, all of whom were stabilized prior to hospital transfer. A total of 1.5% of patients required same-day hospital services, with another 1.5% returning to the ER within 24 hours. A total of 96% of patients did not require hospital services within 24 hours of ablation. The 30-day ER utilization was 13.7%, similar to published data of same-day discharge of AF ablation done in the hospital setting. There were no emergent cardiac surgical interventions and no mortality events. Conclusion: Catheter ablation for AF in the ambulatory setting is both feasible and safe in this large single-center experience. More studies are needed to confirm this next frontier in catheter ablation for AF.

Costs of shoulder and elbow procedures are significantly reduced in ambulatory surgery centers compared to hospital outpatient departments.

BACKGROUND: Recent literature has shown the advantages of outpatient surgery for many shoulder and elbow procedures, including cost savings with equivalent safety in appropriately selected patients. Two common settings for outpatient surgeries are ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), which function as independent financial and administrative entities, or hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), which are owned and operated by hospital systems. The purpose of this study was to compare shoulder and elbow surgery costs between ASCs and HOPDs. METHODS: Publicly available data from 2022 provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) was accessed via the Medicare Procedure Price Lookup Tool. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify shoulder and elbow procedures approved for the outpatient setting by CMS. Procedures were grouped into arthroscopy, fracture, or miscellaneous. Total costs, facility fees, Medicare payments, patient payment (costs not covered by Medicare), and surgeon's fees were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and standard deviations. Cost differences were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Fifty-seven CPT codes were identified. Arthroscopy procedures (n = 16) at ASCs had significantly lower total costs ($2667 ± $989 vs. $4899 ± $1917; P = .009), facility fees ($1974 ± $819 vs. $4206 ± $1753; P = .008), Medicare payments ($2133 ± $791 vs. $3919 ± $1534; P = .009), and patient payments ($533 ± $198 vs. $979 ± $383; P = .009) compared with HOPDs. Fracture procedures (n = 10) at ASCs had lower total costs ($7680 ± $3123 vs. $11,335 ± $3830; P = .049), facility fees ($6851 ± $3033 vs. $10,507 ± $3733; P = .047), and Medicare payments ($6143 ± $2499 vs. $9724 ± $3676; P = .049) compared with HOPDs, although patient payments were not significantly different ($1535 ± $625 vs. $1610 ± $160; P = .449). Miscellaneous procedures (n = 31) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4202 ± $2234 vs. $6985 ± $2917; P < .001), facility fees ($3348 ± $2059 vs. $6132 ± $2736; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3361 ± $1787 vs. $5675 ± $2635; P < .001), and patient payments ($840 ± $447 vs. $1309 ± $350; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. The combined cohort (n = 57) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4381 ± $2703 vs. $7163 ± $3534; P < .001), facility fees ($3577 ± $2570 vs. $6539.1 ± $3391; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3504 ± $2162 vs. $5892 ± $3206; P < .001), and patient payments ($875 ± $540 vs. $1269 ± $393; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. CONCLUSION: Shoulder and elbow procedures performed at HOPDs for Medicare recipients were found to have average total cost increase of 164% compared with those performed at ASCs (184% savings for arthroscopy, 148% for fracture, and 166% for miscellaneous). ASC use conferred lower facility fees, patient payments, and Medicare payments. Policy efforts to incentivize migration of surgeries to ASCs may translate into substantial health care cost savings.

Outpatient minimally invasive spine surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic - A retrospective analysis of 164 consecutive cases.

Objective: To share our surgical experiences of minimally invasive cervical and lumbar procedures for patients who suffered from non-fatal motor vehicle accidents (MVAs) in the ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), minimally invasive laminotomy and discectomy (MILD), percutaneous endoscopic laser-assisted discectomy (PELD) and percutaneous kyphoplasty (PK) were performed on carefully selected patients. Results: From January 2020 to December 2021, our group performed 164 cases on 153 patients involving 249 intervertebral disc (IVD) levels. Of these, 116 cases (70.73%) on 114 patients (74.51%) were cervical, 48 cases (29.27%) were lumbar (including 8 PK cases). Eight patients had both cervical and lumbar procedures in a single anesthetic session (SAS) and were discharged on the same day. One hundred and six ACDF cases (92.17%) were at the C4-C5 and C5-C6 levels, which comprised of 146 (76.04%) IVDs. Of the 40 non-PK lumbar cases, 38 (95.0%) were at L4 to S1 lumbar levels. Six of these cases (15.0%) involved 2 lumbar levels. In contrast, 6 out of 8 kyphoplasties (75.0%) involved lower thoracic/higher lumbar vertebral columns (T11 to L2) and 2 were at the lower lumbar L4 level. Conclusions: We successfully and safely performed various cervical and lumbar spine surgeries in the ASCs amid COVID-19 pandemic and all patients achieved the same-day discharge (SDD). In the non-fatal MVAs, mid-lower cervical (C4 to C6) and lower lumbar (L4 to S1) IVDs were the most affected levels.

Early peripheral vascular interventions for claudication are associated with higher rates of late interventions and progression to chronic limb threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Despite societal guidelines that peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) should not be the first-line therapy for intermittent claudication, a significant number of patients will undergo PVI for claudication within 6 months of diagnosis. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association of early PVI for claudication with subsequent interventions. METHODS: We evaluated 100% of Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify all beneficiaries with a new diagnosis of claudication from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. The primary outcome was late intervention, defined as any femoropopliteal PVI performed >6 months after the claudication diagnosis (through June 30, 2021). Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare the cumulative incidence of late PVI for claudication patients with early (≤6 months) PVI vs those without early PVI. A hierarchical Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the patient- and physician-level characteristics associated with late PVIs. RESULTS: A total of 187,442 patients had a new diagnosis of claudication during the study period, of whom 6069 (3.2%) had undergone early PVI. After a median follow-up of 4.39 years (interquartile range, 3.62-5.17 years), 22.5% of the early PVI patients had undergone late PVI vs 3.6% of those without early PVI (P < .001). Patients treated by high use physicians of early PVI (≥2 standard deviations; physician outliers) were more likely to have received late PVI than were patients treated by standard use physician of early PVI (9.8% vs 3.9%; P < .001). Patients who had undergone early PVI (16.4% vs 7.8%) and patients treated by outlier physicians (9.7% vs 8.0%) were more likely to have developed CLTI (P < .001 for both). After adjustment, the patient factors associated with late PVI included receipt of early PVI (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 6.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.42-7.40) and Black race (vs White; aHR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.10-1.30). The only physician factor associated with late PVI was a majority of practice in an ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory, with an increasing proportion of ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory services associated with significantly increased rates of late PVI (quartile 4 vs quartile 1; aHR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.41-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: Early PVI after the diagnosis of claudication was associated with higher late PVI rates compared with early nonoperative management. High use physicians of early PVI for claudication performed more late PVIs than did their peers, especially those primarily delivering care in high reimbursement settings. The appropriateness of early PVI for claudication needs critical evaluation, as do the incentives surrounding the delivery of these interventions in ambulatory intervention suites.