Procedural and 12-month in-hospital costs of primary infra-popliteal bypass surgery, infrapopliteal best endovascular treatment, and major lower limb amputation for chronic limb threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is a growing global problem due to the widespread use of tobacco and increasing prevalence of diabetes. Although the financial consequences are considerable, few studies have compared the relative cost-effectiveness of different CLTI management strategies. The Bypass vs Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL)-2 trial is randomizing patients with CLTI to primary infrapopliteal (IP) vein bypass surgery (BS) or best endovascular treatment (BET) and includes a comprehensive within-trial cost-utility analysis. The aim of this study is to compare over a 12-month time horizon, the costs of primary IP BS, IP best endovascular treatment (BET), and major limb major amputation (MLLA) to inform the BASIL-2 cost-utility analysis. METHODS: We compared procedural human resource (HR) costs and total in-hospital costs for the index admission, and over the following 12-months, in 60 consecutive patients undergoing primary IP BS (n = 20), IP BET (n = 20), or MLLA (10 transfemoral and 10 transtibial) for CLTI within the BASIL prospective cohort study. RESULTS: Procedural HR costs were greatest for BS (BS £2551; 95% confidence interval [CI], £1934-£2807 vs MLLA £1130; 95% CI, £1046-£1297 vs BET £329; 95% CI, £242-£390; P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis) due to longer procedure duration and greater staff requirement. With regard to the index admission, MLLA was the most expensive due to longer hospital stay (MLLA £13,320; 95% CI, £8986-£18,616 vs BS £8714; 95% CI, £6097-£11,973 vs BET £4813; 95% CI, £3529-£6097; P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis). The total cost of the index admission and in-hospital care over the following 12 months remained least for BET (MLLA £26,327; 95% CI, £17,653-£30,458 vs BS £20,401; 95% CI, £12,071-£23,926 vs BET £12,298; 95% CI, £6961-£15,439; P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis). CONCLUSIONS: Over a 12-month time horizon, MLLA and IP BS are more expensive than IP BET in terms of procedural HR costs and total in-hospital costs. These economic data, together with quality of life data from BASIL-2, will inform the calculation of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for different CLTI management strategies within the BASIL-2 cost-utility analysis.

The influence of socioeconomic status on outcomes of lower extremity arterial reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Although it has been shown that patient socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with the surgical treatments chosen for severe peripheral arterial disease (PAD), the association between SES and outcomes of arterial reconstruction have not been well-studied. The objective of this study was to determine if SES is associated with outcomes following lower extremity arterial reconstruction. METHODS: Patients 40 years and older who had surgical revascularization for severe lower extremity PAD were identified in the Nationwide Readmissions Database, 2010 to 2014. Measures of SES including median household income (MHI) quartiles of patients' residential ZIP codes were extracted. Factors associated with repeat revascularization, subsequent major amputations, hospital mortality, and 30-day all-cause readmission were evaluated using multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: Of the 131,529 patients identified, the majority (61%) were male, and the average age was 69 years. On unadjusted analyses, subsequent amputations were higher among patients in the lowest MHI quartile compared with patients in the highest MHI quartile (13% vs 10%; overall P < .001). On multivariable analyses, compared with patients in the lowest quartile, those in the highest quartile had lower amputation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63-0.77; overall P < .001) and readmission (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99; overall P = .028) rates. However, subsequent revascularization (aOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.94-1.15) and mortality (aOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.28) rates were not different across the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Lower SES is associated with disproportionally worse outcomes following lower extremity arterial reconstruction for severe PAD. These data suggest that improving outcomes of lower extremity arterial reconstruction may involve addressing socioeconomic disparities.

Exploring the rapid expansion of office-based laboratories and peripheral vascular interventions across the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the relationship between office-based laboratory (OBL) use and Medicare payments for peripheral vascular interventions (PVI). METHODS: Using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use Files from 2014 to 2017, we identified providers who performed percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, stent placement, and atherectomy. Procedures were aggregated at the provider and hospital referral region (HRR) level. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2017, 2641 providers performed 308,247 procedures. The mean payment for OBL stent placement in 2017 was $4383.39, and mean payment for OBL atherectomy was $13,079.63. The change in the mean payment amount varied significantly, from a decrease of $16.97 in HRR 146 to an increase of $43.77 per beneficiary over the study period in HRR 11. The change in the rate of PVI also varied substantially, and moderately correlated with change in payment across HRRs (R2 = 0.40; P < .001). The majority of HRRs experienced an increase in rate of PVI within OBLs, which strongly correlated with changes in payments (R2 = 0.85; P < .001). Furthermore, 85% of the variance in change in payment was explained by increases in OBL atherectomy (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A rapid shift into the office setting for PVIs occurred within some HRRs, which was highly geographically variable and was strongly correlated with payments. Policymakers should revisit the current payment structure for OBL use and, in particular atherectomy, to better align the policy with its intended goals.

Patient and Institutional Costs of Failure of Angioplasty of the Superficial Femoral Artery.

BACKGROUND: Debate surrounds the optimal management of superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease. Randomized trial data rarely reflect real world findings, specifically the consequences to the patient of angioplasty failure. We observed the effect of a failed SFA angioplasty on the need for repeated clinic visits, hospital readmissions, imaging requirements, and reinterventions. METHODS: We reviewed a consecutive series of 148 patients (94 men, median age 72 years) undergoing solely SFA angioplasty over a 2-year period. Patient preangioplasty demographics and 2-year post-PTA follow-up data were collated, including hospital attendances (inpatient/outpatient), further imaging (including radiation exposure) and revascularization attempts. We defined "failed angioplasty" as presence of clinical symptoms with radiological evidence of significant restenosis after an initial successful primary SFA angioplasty. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients represented with a failed angioplasty (median time of 4 months after index PTA). In this group, failure of index angioplasty resulted in a further 185 restenosis-related clinic visits and a total of 537 bed days of inpatient stay. This group underwent a further 149 imaging events and required a further 34 endovascular revascularization procedures and 12 infrainguinal bypass procedures. These interventions and investigations corresponded to overall effective radiation dose across all patients of 190.69 mSv. Of the cohort of 99 patients who did not have a "failed angioplasty," they required 100 clinic visits, 21 further scans (total radiation dose 6.42 mSv), and 36 bed days of inpatient admission. CONCLUSIONS: Failed angioplasty results in significant additional consequences for patients and health-care systems. Further work should focus on refining decision-making, providing the right procedure to the right patient at the right time.

Fractional flow reserve-guided multivessel angioplasty in myocardial infarction: three-year follow-up with cost benefit analysis of the Compare-Acute trial.

AIMS: The Compare-Acute trial showed superiority of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided acute complete revascularisation compared to culprit-only treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD) at one year. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome at three years, together with cost analysis of this strategy. METHODS AND RESULTS: After primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 885 patients with STEMI and MVD were randomised (1:2 ratio) to FFR-guided complete revascularisation (295 patients) or infarct-related artery (IRA)-only treatment (590 patients). After 36 months, the primary endpoint (composite of death, myocardial infarction, revascularisation, stroke) occurred significantly less frequently in the FFR-guided complete revascularisation group: 46/295 patients (15.6%) versus 178/590 patients (30.2%) (HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.33-0.64; p<0.001). This benefit was driven mainly by the reduction of revascularisations in the follow-up (12.5% vs 25.2%; HR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31-0.64; p<0.001). Cost analysis shows benefit of the FFR-guided complete revascularisation strategy, which can reduce the cost per patient by up to 21% at one year (8,150€ vs 10,319€) and by 22% at three years (8,653€ vs 11,100€). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI and MVD, FFR-guided complete revascularisation is more beneficial in terms of outcome and healthcare costs compared to IRA-only revascularisation at 36 months.

Cost-Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stents for Infrapopliteal Lesions in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia: The PADI Trial.

PURPOSE: Drug-eluting stents (DES) improve clinical and morphological long-term results compared to percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with bailout bare metal stenting (BMS) in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) and infrapopliteal lesions (PADI trial). We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of DES compared to PTA ± BMS in cooperation with Dutch health insurance company VGZ, using data from the PADI trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the PADI trial, adults with CLI (Rutherford category ≥ 4) and infrapopliteal lesions were randomized to receive DES with paclitaxel or PTA ± BMS. Seventy-four limbs (73 patients) were treated with DES and 66 limbs (64 patients) with PTA ± BMS. The costs were calculated by using the mean costs per stent multiplied by the mean number of stents used per patient (€750 × 1.8 for DES vs €250 × 0.3 for PTA ± BMS). These costs were compared with the costs of major amputation (€16.000) and rehabilitation (first year €15.750, second year €7.375 and third year €3.600). RESULTS: The 5-year major amputation rate was lower in the DES group (19.3% vs 34.0% for PTA ± BMS; p = 0.091). In addition, the 5-year amputation-free survival and event-free survival were significantly higher in the DES group (31.8% vs 20.4%, p=0.043; and 26.2% vs 15.3%, p=0.041, respectively). After 1 year, the cost difference per patient between DES and PTA ± BMS is €1.679 in favor of DES and €2.694 after 3 years. CONCLUSION: In our analysis, DES are cost-effective due to the higher hospital costs of amputation and rehabilitation in the PTA ± BMS group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1b, analysis based on clinically sensible costs and randomized controlled trial.

A Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty With Optional Stenting and Femoropopliteal Bypass Surgery for Medium-Length TASC II B and C Femoropopliteal Lesions.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the total midterm costs and cost-effectiveness of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with optional stenting (PTA/S) as initial treatment compared with femoropopliteal bypass (FPB) surgery in patients with medium-length TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II (TASC) B and C femoropopliteal lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over a period of 3 years, all hospital health care costs for 226 consecutive patients were calculated: 170 patients with a TASC B lesion and 56 patients with a TASC C lesion. In the 135-patient PTA/S group (mean age 69.9±10.9 years; 83 men), 108 (63.5%) patients had TASC B lesions and 27 (48.2%) patients had TASC C lesions. Ninety-one patients (mean age 68.4±10.9 years; 60 men) were treated with FPB for 62 TASC B and 29 TASC C femoropopliteal lesions. The main outcome measure was the primary patency rate at 3-year follow-up. Multiple imputation and bootstrapping techniques were used to analyze the data. The adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated by dividing the difference in total costs by the difference in 3-year primary patency rate. Costs were expressed in euros (€), and cost differences are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Mean total costs per patient were €29,058 in the PTA/S treatment group vs €42,437 in the FPB group (mean adjusted difference -€14,820, 95% CI -€29,044 to -€5976). Differences in 3-year primary patency between PTA/S and FPB were small and nonsignificant (68.9% and 70.3%, respectively). An ICER of 563,716 was found, indicating that FPB costs €563,716 more per one extra patient reaching 3-year primary patency in comparison with PTA/S treatment. CONCLUSION: FPB in medium-length femoropopliteal lesions involved higher total costs when evaluated over a 3-year follow-up period. An endovascular-first approach is recommended, as this will result in cost minimization for patients with medium-length femoropopliteal disease.

Cost-Effectiveness of Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Angiography Screening and Submaximal Angioplasty for Symptomatic Vertebrobasilar Disease.

Background and Purpose- The VERiTAS (Vertebrobasilar Flow Evaluation and Risk of Transient Ischemic Attack and Stroke) study demonstrated posterior circulation distal flow status, determined by quantitative magnetic resonance angiography, is a robust predictor of vertebrobasilar stroke risk in patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic vertebrobasilar disease. Flow-compromised high-risk patients may benefit from flow-restoring endovascular procedures, such as submaximal angioplasty. In this study, we examine the cost-effectiveness of quantitative magnetic resonance angiography screening to identify patients who may benefit from submaximal angioplasty to restore vertebrobasilar flow. Methods- A Markov model was created comparing a no screening strategy with standard medical management alone and a screening strategy involving quantitative magnetic resonance angiography imaging and submaximal angioplasty for treatable patients with low vertebrobasilar flow for a 30-year time horizon. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and lifetime costs. Rates of stroke and death were obtained from VERiTAS data, and disability rates and costs were derived from VERiTAS and the literature. A sensitivity analysis was performed with periprocedural stroke rate from angioplasty the primary variable of interest. Results- At a 6% periprocedural stroke risk, the screening strategy saved an average of 0.364 QALYs per patient and a lifetime cost savings of $7312 versus the no screening strategy. Among patients with low flow suitable for intervention, the benefit was substantially higher, averaging 1.485 QALYs saved and lifetime cost savings of $21 294. Across the entire cohort, QALY savings were observed at the end of the first year and economic savings at year 6. The benefit of screening declined at higher periprocedural risk. Conclusions- Quantitative magnetic resonance angiography screening and submaximal angioplasty with 6% periprocedural risk in suitable patients are cost effective both in terms of QALY and lifetime costs for patients with symptomatic vertebrobasilar occlusive disease. With potential health and economic savings, a clinical trial examining the periprocedural risk of submaximal angioplasty is warranted. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00590980.

Nationally Representative Readmission Factors in Patients with Claudication and Critical Limb Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are associated not only with increased mortality, morbidity, and costs but also, with current health-care reform, tied to significant financial and administrative penalties. Some studies show that patients undergoing vascular surgery may have higher than average readmission rates. The recently released Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD) is the most comprehensive national source of readmission data, gathering discharge information from 22 geographically dispersed states, accounting for 51.2% of the total U.S. resident population and 49.3% of all U.S. hospitalizations. The aim of this study is to use the power of the NRD and obtain nationally representative readmission information for patients admitted with claudication or critical limb ischemia (CLI) who underwent revascularization procedures. METHODS: The NRD was queried for all patients admitted for claudication (International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision [ICD-9] 440.21) or CLI (ICD-9 440.22-440.24) and who underwent percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, peripheral bypass, or aortofemoral bypass. Patient demographics, comorbidities, length of stay (LOS), mortality, readmission rates, and associated costs were collected. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was implemented on claudication and CLI groups on all outcomes of interest. The most common readmission diagnosis codes and diagnosis groups were also identified. RESULTS: A total of 92,769 patients were admitted for peripheral vascular disease (33,055 with claudication and 59,714 with CLI). The 30-day readmission/any readmission rate was 8.97%/21.49% and 19.26%/40.36%, for claudication and CLI, respectively. Significant differences were found for claudication and CLI, respectively, on initial cost of admission ($18,548 vs. $29,148, P < 0.001), readmission costs ($14,726 vs. $17,681 P < 0.001), LOS (4 days vs. 9 days, P < 0.001), days to readmission (73 days vs. 59 days, P < 0.001), mortality during initial admission (256 vs. 1,363, P < 0.001), and mortality during any admission (538 vs. 3,838, P < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis found that claudication, CLI, angioplasty, peripheral bypass, aortofemoral bypass, female sex, age >65, Charlson Comorbidity Index, LOS, and primary expected payer status were all significant predictors of 30-day and overall readmissions at varying degrees. The 5 most common disease readmission groups found were other vascular procedures (12.6%), amputation of lower limb except toes (6.3%), sepsis (5.4%), heart failure (4.9%) and postoperative or other device infections (4.8%). Of the abovementioned groups, the 4 most common diagnoses included "other postoperative infections," sepsis, atherosclerosis of native arteries with gangrene, and "other complications due to other vascular device, implant, or graft." CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that there is a significant difference in readmission rates, cost, and morbidity between patients admitted for claudication and CLI. Furthermore, based on regression analysis, there are multiple other clear risk factors associated with worse clinical and economic outcomes. Further study is needed to predict which patients will require increased vigilance during their hospital stay to prevent readmissions and worse outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management/epidemiological, level IV.

An Economic Analysis of Stent Grafts for Treatment of Vascular Access Stenosis: Point-of-Care and Medicare Perspectives in the United States.

PURPOSE: To conduct an economic analysis on the impact of increased stent graft (SG) use for treatment of arteriovenous graft (AVG) anastomotic stenosis or arteriovenous fistula (AVF)/AVG in-stent restenosis (ISR) from United States point-of-care (POC) and Medicare perspectives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analyses compared initial device and reintervention costs over 2 years between current and projected treatment mixes, including percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), bare metal stents (BMSs), and SGs. In projected scenarios, the absolute increase in SG use was approximately 3%. Costs included procedure reimbursement rates (Medicare) and device list prices (POC) for index procedures and reinterventions. Reintervention rates and types were informed by the RENOVA and RESCUE randomized trials. Reinterventions were primarily PTA only; however, stent use occurred a proportion of the time. BMS reintervention rates were assumed to be identical to PTA based on observational data. A population size of 1,000 patients was assumed. RESULTS: To the POC (n = 1,000), increased SG use was predicted to result in cost savings ranging from $4,106 to $34,420 for AVG anastomotic stenosis. For AVF/AVG ISR, increased SG use was predicted to result in either a cost increase of $17,187 or a cost savings of $13,159. To Medicare (n = 1,000), increased SG use was predicted to save costs for both populations, with savings ranging from $57,401 to $169,544. CONCLUSIONS: The use of SG for treatment of AVG anastomotic stenosis and AVF/AVG ISR appears to be economically favorable for POC providers and Medicare. Further data on reintervention rates are required from other SG trials to validate findings.

A retrospective cost analysis of angioplasty compared to bypass surgery for lower limb arterial disease in an Australian tertiary health service.

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and surgical bypass (BYP) are treatment options for symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD). PTA and BYP have different clinical outcomes and cost implications. This paper aims to compare hospital-related costs of PTA and BYP for PAD of the lower limbs in an Australian health service. METHODS: A retrospective cost analysis using clinical and financial data from an urban, tertiary hospital was performed. Patient cohorts were matched to existing published studies and 3-year findings were calculated. Outcomes measured were mean initial admission cost; mean bed stay; mean complication rate; mean cost of re-intervention at 12 months and extrapolated mean cost at 3 years. RESULTS: The mean total admission costs for PTA compared to BYP were $8758 vs. $27,849 (P < 0.001). Patients undergoing BYP were admitted for 10.25 vs. 3.77 nights (P < 0.001). The complication rate was greater in the BYP group for infection only. Re-intervention was required by 13% of the PTA group and 16% of the BYP group, at a mean cost of $11,798 and $14,728, respectively (P = 0.453). The extrapolated total mean cost at 3 years was higher in the BYP group for patients with both intermittent claudication ($26,764 vs. $11,402) and critical limb ischaemia ($27,719 vs. $12,655). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, PTA is a favourable alternative to BYP for PAD of the lower limbs as it is less costly, does not result in a greater re-intervention rate at 1 year and has been previously demonstrated to have comparable clinical outcomes. Given the limitations of this retrospective analysis, a prospective cost-effectiveness analysis is recommended.

Investigation into drivers of cost of stenting for carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify factors associated with cost of carotid artery stenting (CAS). METHODS: Patient and hospital characteristics affecting cost of admission for CAS were identified using the Vizient national database of hospital-reported outcomes. Patients who underwent CAS for either asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis were identified using surgical Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Groups and appropriate International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision codes. RESULTS: There were 166 hospitals that reported outcomes from 7369 inpatient admissions for CAS. Each institution reported a mean value for cost related to patient care per admission for CAS; the average cost across all reporting institutions was $12,834.14 (standard error of the mean [SEM], 492.88). Institutions in the lowest 25th percentile with respect to frequency of intensive care unit admission after CAS had lower cost of admission than institutions above the 75th percentile ($10,971.30 [SEM, 460.67] vs $14,992.90 [964.29]; P = .002), without any differences in incidence of stroke during admission (2.2% [SEM, 0.3] vs 2.0% [0.4]; P = .877) or 30-day readmission (1.9% [SEM, 0.4] vs 2.5 [0.6]; P = .329). Admissions for patients with symptomatic stenosis were more expensive than those with asymptomatic stenosis ($20,462.10 [SEM, 819.93] vs $11,285.20 [347.11]; P < .001). Obesity was also associated with greater costs of admission ($14,176.20 [SEM, 597.13] vs $12,287.10 [395.73]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Admission to an intensive care unit, symptomatic stenosis, and obesity were associated with increased costs in patients undergoing CAS. These data may aid in identifying opportunities to improve the cost-effectiveness of this procedure.

Fixed and variable cost of carotid endarterectomy and stenting in the United States: A comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite multiple landmark clinical trials, little data exists on real-world cost of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to the United States healthcare system. We aim to study differences in actual hospitalization cost between patients who underwent CAS vs CEA in a nationally representative database. METHODS: We studied hospital discharge and billing records of all patients, in the Premier Perspective Database, who underwent CEA or CAS between the third quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of 2015. Nearest-neighbor 1:1 propensity score matching was performed, to account for differences in patient and hospital characteristics as well as clinical comorbidities of patients who underwent both procedures, for both symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts using 32 variables. Pearson χ2, Student t-test, and nonparametric K-sample equality-of-medians tests were used to analyze the data, as appropriate. The primary outcome was total in-hospital cost, including fixed (administrative, capital and utilities) and variable costs (labor and supply). Cost data were presented as medians, inflation-adjusted for 2015 U.S. dollar and rounded to the nearest dollar. RESULTS: A total of 115,548 procedures were identified. The mean age was 71 and 69 years; 58% and 57% were male patients; and 81% and 77% were white among asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, respectively. After propensity score matching, 25,812 asymptomatic (12,906 CEA and 12,906 CAS) and 3864 symptomatic (1932 CEA and 1932 CAS) patients were included. Total hospitalization cost per CAS was 40% ($11,814 vs $8378; P < .001) and 37% ($19,426 vs $14,190; P < .001) higher than CEA among asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, respectively. Patients who underwent CAS incurred significantly higher total hospitalization cost despite stratifying by type of cost (fixed and variable), U.S. census regions and symptomatic status. Moreover, asymptomatic patients who underwent CAS performed by any surgical specialty incurred an average of $2717 to $4918 higher total hospitalization cost compared with patients who underwent CEA (all P < 001). Among symptomatic patients, those who underwent CAS performed by vascular, cardiac, and neurologic surgeons, incurred $2108 ($16,114 vs $14,006; P = .006), $7055 ($17,351 vs $10,296; P = .023) and $6479 ($27,290 vs $20,811; P = .002) higher total hospitalization cost compared with patients who underwent CEA, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The total hospitalization cost incurred by patients who underwent CAS was significantly higher than for those who underwent CEA, despite matching cohort based on patient and hospital characteristics, and stratifying by symptomatic status, type of cost, hospital region, and surgeon specialty. Our findings could provide additional important information giving the ongoing controversy regarding the appropriate indication for CAS.

Cost-effectiveness of superficial femoral artery endovascular interventions in the UK and Germany: a modelling study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the lifetime costs and cost-effectiveness of 5 endovascular interventions to treat superficial femoral arterial disease. DESIGN: A model-based health economic evaluation. An existing decision analytical model was used, with updated effectiveness data taken from the literature, and updated costs based on purchasing prices. SETTING: UK and German healthcare perspectives were considered. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with intermittent claudication of the femoropopliteal arteries eligible for endovascular treatment. METHODS: UK and German healthcare perspectives were considered, as were different strategies for re-intervention. INTERVENTIONS: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with bail-out bare metal stenting (assumed to represent the existing standard of care, and 4 alternatives: primary bare metal stents, drug-eluting stents, drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) and biomimetic stents). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between 2 treatments, defined as the incremental costs divided by the incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: Use of a biomimetic stent, BioMimics 3D, was always estimated to dominate the other interventions, having lower lifetime costs and greater effectiveness, as measured by QALYs. Of the remaining interventions, DEBs were always the most effective, and PTA the least effective. There was uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results, with key drivers being the costs and effectiveness of the biomimetic stent along with the costs of DEBs. CONCLUSIONS: All 4 of the alternatives to PTA were more effective, with the biomimetic stent being the most cost-effective. As there was uncertainty in the results, and all of the interventions have different mechanisms of action, all 4 may be considered to be alternatives to PTA.

Medicare Facility Diagnosis-Related Groups Have Outpaced Individual Physician Payment.

BACKGROUND: We set out to compare the rates of Medicare reimbursement to physicians versus hospitals for several major vascular procedures over a period of 5 years. METHODS: We queried the Wolters Kluwer MediRegs database to collect Medicare reimbursement data from fiscal years 2011 to 2015. We surveyed reimbursements for carotid endarterectomy, carotid angioplasty and stenting, femoropopliteal bypass, and lower extremity fem-pop revascularization with stenting. Based on data availability, we surveyed physician reimbursement data on the national level and in both medically overserved and underserved areas. Hospital reimbursement rates were examined on a national level and by hospitals' teaching and wage index statuses. RESULTS: We found that for all 4 vascular procedures, Medicare reimbursements to hospitals increased by a greater percentage than to physicians. By region, underserved areas had lower physician reimbursements than the national average, while the opposite was true for overserved areas. Additionally, for hospital Medicare reimbursements, location in a high wage index accounted for a significant increase in reimbursement over the national average, with teaching status contributing to this increase in a smaller extent. CONCLUSIONS: These data on Medicare reimbursements indicate that payments to hospitals are increasing more significantly than to physicians. This disparity in pay changes affects both independent and academic vascular surgeons. Medicare should consider pay increases to independent providers in accordance to the hospital pay increase.

The Readmission Event after Vascular Surgery: Causes and Costs.

BACKGROUND: The study evaluates the readmission diagnoses after vascular surgical interventions and the associated hospital costs. METHODS: Patients readmitted after undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS), carotid endarterectomy (CEA), infrarenal endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAAA), suprainguinal revascularization (SUPRA), or infrainguinal revascularization (INFRA) between January 1, 2008 and October 20, 2013 at a single academic institution were retrospectively identified. Demographic, preoperative, and postoperative event variables were obtained by chart review. The diagnoses and the costs of the readmission event were obtained by chart review and from hospital financial data. Readmission indications were grouped as unrelated or planned readmissions, procedure-specific complications, wound complications, cardiac causes, and other. Univariate analyses of categorical variables were performed with χ2 or Fisher exact test where appropriate. Continuous variables were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: A total of 1,170 patient records were identified. Thirty-day readmission occurred in 112 patients (9.6%). The readmission rate was significantly different between groups: 4.5% in CAS (n = 8/177), 8.5% in CEA (21/246), 5.8% in EVAR (18/312), 11.4% in OAAA (4/35), 15.6% in INFRA (33/212), 13.5% in SUPRA (24/178), and 40% in combined SUPRA and INFRA (4/10) (P < 0.0001). Readmissions were unrelated or planned in 19.6% of patients. Wound complications were the most common readmission diagnoses (36.6%, 41/112).There was a difference in the distribution of readmission indications among procedure groups, with wound complications being predominant in INFRA and SUPRA groups (60.6% and 58.3%, respectively), and cardiac events predominantly in EVAR patients (42%) (P < 0.001). In univariable analysis of predictors of readmission, significant preoperative factors were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, renal insufficiency, and lower hematocrit. Significant postoperative predictors included any postoperative complication, number of complications, increased length of stay, wound complications, postoperative infections, blood transfusion, and reoperation. The median hospital cost for readmission for wound complications was 29,723 USD (interquartile range 23,841-36,878), and for cardiac complications was 39,784 USD (26,305-46,918). The median cost of readmission for bypass graft occlusion was 33,366 USD (20,530-43,170). The median length of stay also differed depending on the readmission diagnosis and was highest for bypass graft occlusion (8.5 days). CONCLUSIONS: Readmissions after vascular procedures are associated with high cost and hospital bed utilization. Wound complications continue to be the dominant readmission etiology. The characterization of these costs and risk factors in this study can allow for resource allocation to minimize preventable related readmissions. A significant proportion of readmissions after vascular interventions are planned or unrelated, which should be taken into consideration in metric benchmarking and performance comparisons.

Predictors of poor outcome after carotid intervention.

BACKGROUND: A variety of patient factors are known to adversely impact outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS). However, their specific impact on complications and mortality and how they differ between CEA and CAS is unknown. The purpose of this study is to identify patient and hospital factors that adversely impact outcomes. METHODS: Patients who underwent CEA or CAS between 1998 and 2012 (N = 1,756,445) were identified using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality National Inpatient Sample and State Ambulatory Services Databases. A multivariate analysis was completed to evaluate the impact of demographics, patient factors, type of symptoms (transient ischemic attack or cerebrovascular accident), volume of cases (3 per year vs 1-2 interventions), and interventions upon outcomes, perioperative complications (stroke, myocardial infarction, and bleeding), duration of stay, inpatient mortality, and cost. Significant factors were then used as part of a multivariate regression analysis to determine odds ratios. A subgroup analysis using propensity matching evaluating 1:1 risk-matched asymptomatic and symptomatic patients was completed. Patient cohorts were matched on the basis of Charlson scores. RESULTS: Over the study period a total of 1,583,614 asymptomatic CEA, 7317 asymptomatic CAS, 162,362 symptomatic CEA, and 3149 symptomatic CAS patients were included. Symptomatic disease portends a worse outlook after either CEA or CAS. Costs of the procedure increased with complications with stroke adding the most significant cost burden. For risk-matched asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, female gender (P < .001) and performing one or two cases per year (P < .05) were associated with higher cerebrovascular accident risk. In asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, predictors of myocardial infarction included congestive heart failure (P < .001) and peripheral artery disease (P < .05) and predictors of bleeding included peripheral artery disease (P < .05) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P < .01) for symptomatic patients only. For both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, predictors of mortality included female gender (P < .001) and performing one or two cases per year (P < .01). Female gender was one of the strongest overall predictors of adverse outcome after CAS (odds ratio, 21.39 for death; P < .001). Low volume (<3 cases per year per practitioner) is a predictor of adverse outcome after CAS only. CONCLUSIONS: Higher rates of postoperative stroke and inpatient mortality for women undergoing CAS is an unexpected finding, and may indicate that this population is vulnerable to complications after endovascular management. Low volume is a predictor of complications and subsequent mortality primarily for CAS. Patients who undergo CEA continue to have superior outcomes compared with matched cohorts who undergo CAS.

Economic Evaluation of the Use of Drug-Eluting Stents versus Bare-Metal Stents in Adults with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Requiring Angioplasty.

BACKGROUND: The value of drug-eluting stents in preventing cardiovascular events has not been investigated in Mexico. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of early and new-generation drug-eluting stents from the perspective of a healthcare provider. METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of early and new-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy attending a Cardiology Hospital of the Mexican Social Security Institute. The health endpoint used was major acute cardiovascular events prevented. The effectiveness by stent type was obtained from the literature. A retrospective chart review study was conducted to collect cost data on cardiovascular events including seven cost categories. Average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of estimates. RESULTS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in base-case were 28,910 and US$ 35,590 for early and new-generation stents, respectively. In an optimal scenario, incremental-cost effectiveness ratio was 24,776 and US$ 25,262 for early and new stents, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that 90% of cases were cost-effective when willingness-to-pay was 58,000 and US$ 66,000 for early and new-generation stents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness ratios of early and new-generation stents were significantly higher than corresponding bare-metal stents.

Impact of Hospital Volume on Outcomes of Endovascular Stenting for Adult Aortic Coarctation.

Use of transcatheter endovascular stenting has been increasing in the treatment of coarctation of aorta (CoA). The present study was undertaken on adults with CoA who underwent stent placement from 2000 to 2011 to analyze the relation of hospital volumes to the outcomes of stenting in adults with CoA. It was a retrospective study based on Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2000 to 2011 and identified subjects using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification procedure code of 747.10 (CoA). Annual hospital volume was calculated using unique hospital identifiers. Weights provided by the Nationwide Inpatient Sample were used to generate national estimates. A total of 105 (weighted 521) subjects were identified with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, code of 39.90 (Endovascular stent). Hospital volumes were divided into tertiles. We compared the highest tertile (≥3 procedures annually) with other tertiles (<3 procedure annually). The composite outcomes of the analysis were procedure-related complications, length of stay (LOS), and cost in relation to the hospital volume. No inhospital death was reported in either group. Hospitals with ≥3 procedures annually had significantly lower incidence of complications (9.5% vs 23.0%) compared to the hospitals with <3 procedures annually (p-value 0.002). Similar results were obtained after multivariate regression analysis in relation to hospital volume. Shorter LOS and lower cost were observed with annual hospital volume of ≥3 procedures. In conclusion, stenting adults for CoA is remarkably safe, and the outcomes of the procedure have improved in centers with annual hospital volume of ≥3 procedures. There is also decreasing trend of procedure-related complications, shorter LOS, and lower costs compared to centers with annual volume <3 procedures.

Comparison of Inhospital Outcomes and Hospitalization Costs of Peripheral Angioplasty and Endovascular Stenting.

The comparative data for angioplasty and stenting for treatment of peripheral arterial disease are largely limited to technical factors such as patency rates with sparse data on clinical outcomes like mortality, postprocedural complications, and amputation. The study cohort was derived from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from 2006 to 2011. Peripheral endovascular interventions were identified using appropriate International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) Diagnostic and procedural codes. Two-level hierarchical multivariate mixed models were created. The primary outcome includes inhospital mortality, and secondary outcome was a composite of inhospital mortality and postprocedural complications. Amputation was a separate outcome. Hospitalization costs were also assessed. Endovascular stenting (odds ratio, 95% confidence interval, p value) was independently predictive of lower composite end point of inhospital mortality and postprocedural complications compared with angioplasty alone (0.96, 0.91 to 0.99, 0.025) and lower amputation rates (0.56, 0.53 to 0.60, <0.001) with no significant difference in terms of inhospital mortality alone. Multivariate analysis also revealed stenting to be predictive of higher hospitalization costs ($1,516, 95% confidence interval 1,082 to 1,950, p <0.001) compared with angioplasty. In conclusion, endovascular stenting is associated with a lower rate of postprocedural complications, lower amputation rates, and only minimal increase in hospitalization costs compared with angioplasty alone.