[Cost-revenue aspects of endovascular treatment of distal aortic arch pathologies with respect to the introduction of a new thoracic side-branch prosthesis]. / Kosten-Erlös-Aspekte der endovaskulären Versorgung distaler Aortenbogenpathologien im Hinblick auf die Einführung einer neuen thorakalen Seitenarmprothese.

BACKGROUND: The standard vascular surgical procedure (SV) for the treatment of distal aortic arch pathologies involves a hybrid approach using a left carotid-subclavian bypass and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Considering the introduction of a thoracic side branch prosthesis (TBE), the aim of this study was to analyze the cost-revenue aspects of both procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on cases treated by SV from 2017 to 2022. To draw conclusions regarding the use of TBE, the main diagnoses and procedures of SV were recoded based on current classifications (ICD/OPS 2023) for revenue calculations and regrouped according to aG-DRG 2023. An OPS modification and regrouping were performed for modeling TBE revenues. RESULTS: A total of 13 cases were identified (mean age 62.5 ± 13.8 years; 10 males). After regrouping, the following DRGs were obtained: F42Z in N = 5, F51A in N = 4, F08B in N = 2, and F07A and F36B each in N = 1. The total revenue after regrouping was €â€¯666,514.13, including an additional payment (ZE) of €â€¯132,729.14. With the modeled application of TBE, a total revenue of €â€¯659,212.19 was achieved. Compared to SV, this represents a revenue decrease of €â€¯16,886.71 (changed DRG), but with an increase in ZE revenue by €â€¯65,559.78 (different ZE). The use of TBE resulted in a saving of 74 occupancy days, including 13.5 days in intensive care. CONCLUSION: A cost coverage seems probable with a change in the procedure, despite the yet to be determined pricing of TBE. This is highly dependent on the coding quality and the future development of ZE, given the annually changing DRG relative weights. Precise and transparent performance and cost documentation are essential for determining the pricing.

Trends of vascular surgery procedures in Marfan syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Marfan syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome represent two connective tissue vascular diseases requiring unique consideration in their vascular surgical care. A comprehensive national review encompassing all hospitalizations for the Marfan Syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome patient population is lacking. METHODS: The National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2014 was reviewed for all inpatient vascular surgery procedures including those with a diagnosis of Marfan syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. National estimates of vascular surgery rates were generated from provided weights. Patient demographics, procedure type, and outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: There were 3103 Marfan syndrome and 476 Ehlers-Danlos syndrome vascular procedures identified as well as 3,895,381 vascular procedures in the remainder of population (control group). The percent of aortic procedures from all vascular procedures in Marfan syndrome (23.5%) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (23.5%) were 2.5-fold higher than controls (9.1%), p < 0.0001. Open aortic aneurysm repair was also significantly greater in both Marfan syndrome (16.8%) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (11.2%) compared to controls (4.4%), p < 0.0001. Endovascular aortic repair (p < 0.2302) was similar among the groups. Marfan syndrome (7.7%) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (5.1%) had more thoracic endovascular aortic repair performed than controls (0.7%), p < 0.0001. Percutaneous procedures were fewer in Marfan syndrome (6.3%) than controls (31.3%) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (26.3%), p < 0.0001, while repair of peripheral arteries was greater in Marfan syndrome (5.9%) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (4.1%) than controls (1.5%), p < 0.0001. For total aortic procedures, the mean age of aortic procedures was 68.2 years in controls vs 45.8 years in Marfan syndrome and 55.3 years in Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, p < 0.0001. Marfan syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome had fewer comorbidities overall, while controls had significantly higher rates of coronary artery disease (controls 39.9% vs Marfan syndrome 8.3% and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome 13.0%, p < 0.0001), peripheral vascular disease (controls 34.5% vs Marfan syndrome 4.2% and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome 8.7%, p < 0.0001), and diabetes (controls 20.6% vs Marfan syndrome 6.6 and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome 4.4%, p < 0.0001). Marfan syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome had higher overall complication rate (65.5% and 52.2%) compared to controls (44.6%), p < 0.0001. Postoperative hemorrhage was more likely in Marfan syndrome (42.9%) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (39.1%) than controls (22.2%), p < 0.0001. Increased respiratory failure was noted in Marfan syndrome (20.2%) vs controls (10.7%) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (8.7%), p = .0003. Finally, length of stay was increased in Marfan syndrome 12.5 days vs Ehlers-Danlos syndrome 7.4 days and controls 7.2 days (p < 0.0001) as well as a higher median costs of index hospitalization in Marfan syndrome ($57,084 vs Ehlers-Danlos syndrome $22,032 and controls $26,520, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Marfan syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome differ from other patients undergoing vascular surgical procedures, with a significantly higher proportion of aortic procedures including open aneurysm repair and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. While they are younger with fewer comorbidities, due to the unique pathogenesis of their underlying connective tissue disorder, there is an overall higher rate of procedural complications and increased length of stay and cost for Marfan syndrome patients undergoing aortic surgery.

Endovascular Approach Versus Aortobifemoral Bypass Grafting: Outcomes in Extensive Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Compare technical, clinical, and economic outcomes between endovascular and open approaches in patients with type D aortoiliac occlusive disease according to the TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus. METHODS: Patients undergoing revascularization for type D aortoiliac lesions, either endovascular or open surgery approach, from 2 Portuguese institutions between January 2011 and October 2017 were included. The surgical technique was left to the surgeon discretion. Patients with common femoral artery affection, both obstructive and aneurysmatic, were excluded. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients underwent aortobifemoral bypass and 32 patients were submitted to endovascular repair. The patients undergoing endovascular procedure were more likely to present with chronic heart failure (P = .001) and chronic kidney disease (P = .022) and less likely to have a history of smoking (P = .05). The mean follow-up period was 67.84 (95% confidence interval = 61.85-73.83) months. The open surgery approach resulted in a higher technical success (P = .001); however, limb salvage and patency rates were not different between groups. Endovascular approach was associated with a shorter length-of-stay, both inpatient (6 vs 9 days; P = .041) and patients admitted in the intensive care unit (0 vs 3.81 days; P = .001) as well as lower hospital expenses (US$9281 vs US$23 038; P = .001) with a similar procedure cost (US$2316 vs US$1173; P = .6). No differences were found in the postsurgical quality of life. CONCLUSION: Endovascular approach is, at least, clinically equivalent to open surgery approach and is more cost-efficient. The "endovascular-first" approach should be considered for type D occlusive aortoiliac lesions.

The Consequences of Negligence Claims in Arterial Surgery - An Analysis of Two Periods with an Increasing Use of Endovascular Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: Patient treatment within the Swedish medical service system can claim negligence injuries to the malpractice insurance review board and request financial compensation. The aim of this paper was to analyse the consequences of a negligence claim after arterial surgery between two periods with increasing use of endovascular treatment. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of the arterial surgery negligence claims from two three year periods 2005-2007 (Period A) and 2012-2014 (Period B) from the County Council's Mutual Insurance Company. The analysis was restricted to aortic, carotid, and lower limb arterial diseases. The magnitude of surgery for vascular diseases was obtained from the Swedish vascular register (Swedvasc). RESULTS: The number of patients undergoing arterial procedures increased from 16 628 to 20 709 (p = .01). There was an increase of 54% in the number of negligence claims between the periods. In Period A, the number of compensated claims was 22 out of 83 (29%) and in Period B 60 out of 151 (41%) (p = .06). Patients treated for aortic disorders and peripheral arterial surgery received compensation with increasing frequency whereas carotid diseases decreased. Claimants treated for aortic disorders were compensated in four out of 23 (17%) and 21 out of 54 (39%) in the two periods (p = .07), and after lower limb arterial surgery in six out of 34 (18%) and in 24 out of 71 (34%) (p = .09). After carotid surgery the corresponding figures were 12 out of 26 (46%) and 14 out of 25 (46%) (p = .48). The increasing use of endovascular procedures (but not in carotid artery surgery) did not seem to influence the pattern of negligence claims. CONCLUSIONS: Between the two three year periods there has been an increase in negligence claims but not in compensated ones. The increased use of endovascular procedures has not influenced the pattern of compensated negligence claims.

An economic analysis of medical and surgical management of aortopathy associated with bicuspid aortic valve.

AIMS: To develop a cost-effectiveness model to address the outcome and economic implications of different thresholds for surgery in the management of aortopathy associated with bicuspid aortic valve disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: A model was created from the perspective of an Australian healthcare funding agency. The index case was a 65-year-old with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and ascending aorta diameter of 5.0 cm. Health states were defined as: pre-operative with dilated aorta, post-operative without complications, post-complication, and death. The mean and variance of risks and transition probabilities were taken from a local surgical database and local costs and utilities of elective and urgent thoracic aortic surgery (AoS) with or without aortic valve replacement, with a sensitivity analysis based on a systematic review. Scenario analyses were provided for other aortic dimensions. Implications for survival, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were calculated from healthcare delivery and economic perspectives. After 10 000 simulations for the reference case, the utility of watchful waiting (WW) exceeded that of elective AoS (13 ± 4 vs. 10 ± 5 QALY). The net monetary benefit was A$351 063 ± 304 965 with immediate AoS vs. 534 797 ± 198 570 with WW surveillance. The most important variables affecting effectiveness were utility value of survivors, rate of aortic growth, and probability of acute aortic event during WW. CONCLUSIONS: This decision-analytic model informed by our practice, as well as a systematic analysis, shows that AoS in a BAV patient with aorta <5 cm diameter is costlier and less effective than WW.

Cost-utility analysis comparing laparoscopic vs open aortobifemoral bypass surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass has become an established treatment option for symptomatic aortoiliac obstructive disease at dedicated centers. Minimally invasive surgical techniques like laparoscopic surgery have often been shown to reduce expenses and increase patients' health-related quality of life. The main objective of our study was to measure quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs after totally laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a within trial analysis in a larger ongoing randomized controlled prospective multicenter trial, Norwegian Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery Trial. Fifty consecutive patients suffering from symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease suitable for aortobifemoral bypass surgery were randomized to either totally laparoscopic (n=25) or open surgical procedure (n=25). One patient dropped out of the study before surgery. We measured health-related quality of life using the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire at 4 different time points, before surgery and for 6 months during follow-up. We calculated the QALYs gained by using the area under the curve for both groups. Costs were calculated based on prices for surgical equipment, vascular prosthesis and hospital stay. RESULTS: We found a significantly higher increase in QALYs after laparoscopic vs open aortobifemoral bypass surgery, with a difference of 0.07 QALYs, (p=0.001) in favor of laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass. The total cost of surgery, equipment and hospital stay after laparoscopic surgery (9,953 €) was less than open surgery (17,260 €), (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass seems to be cost-effective compared with open surgery, due to an increase in QALYs and lower procedure-related costs.

Ultra low-dose chest ct with iterative reconstructions as an alternative to conventional chest x-ray prior to heart surgery (CRICKET study): Rationale and design of a multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Stroke after cardiac surgery is a severe complication with a persistently high incidence of 1.4 - 9.7%. Postoperative strokes are mainly embolic and can be provoked by manipulation and clamping of the aorta during cardiac surgery, resulting in the mobilization of atherothrombotic material and calcifications from the aortic wall. Computed tomography (CT) can offer preoperative visualization of aortic calcifications with low radiation exposure. We hypothesize that preoperative knowledge regarding the location and extent of aortic calcifications can be used to optimize surgical strategy and decrease postoperative stroke rate. METHODS/DESIGN: The CRICKET study (ultra low-dose chest CT with iterative reconstructions as an alternative to conventional chest x-ray prior to heart surgery) is a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial to evaluate whether non-contrast chest CT before cardiac surgery can decrease postoperative stroke rate by optimizing surgical strategy. Patients scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery aged 18 years and older are eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria are pregnancy, a chest/cardiac CT in the past three months, emergency surgery, concomitant or prior participation in a study with ionizing radiation and unwillingness to be informed about incidental findings. Subjects (n = 1.724) are randomized between routine care, including a chest x-ray, or routine care with an additional low dose chest CT. The primary objective is to investigate whether the postoperative in-hospital stroke rate is reduced in the CT arm compared to the routine care arm of the randomized trial. The secondary outcome measures are altered surgical approach based on CT findings and cost-effectiveness.

Effect of differences in extubation timing on postoperative care following abdominal aortic replacement surgery: a comparison study.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic replacement requires an extensive incision and strict blood pressure control, making rapid extubation of the tracheal tube and pain management difficult. The effects of extubation timing on the postoperative course and medical costs in the intensive care unit (ICU) were analyzed. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective abdominal aortic replacement were evaluated retrospectively. Patients were divided into those extubated on the day of surgery (Group A) and those extubated later (Group B). Group A was subdivided into extubation in the operating room (Group A1) or in the ICU (Group A2). Intubation time in the ICU, postoperative ICU stay, hospital stay, and total ICU expenses were compared among the four groups. RESULTS: Of the 191 patients, 95 were extubated on the day of surgery (Group A) and 96 later (Group B). The two groups differed in age and percutaneous coronary intervention history. Surgery and anesthesia durations, intraoperative infusion volume, and intraoperative bleeding amounts differed significantly in the two groups. Epidural anesthesia was given more frequently in Group A. Mean intubation time in the ICU (2.6 ± 2.8 vs 17.4 ± 5.1 hours, P < 0.01), the ICU stay (2.1 ± 0.3 vs 2.4 ± 0.8 days, P < 0.01), and the hospital stay (16.4 ± 5.2 vs 20.2 ± 12.5 days, P = 0.02) were significantly shorter, and total ICU expenses were significantly lower (1,036 ± 307 vs 1,565 ± 1,072 dollars, P < 0.01), in Group A than in Group B. Of the 95 patients in Group A, 34 were extubated in the operating room (Group A1) and 61 in the ICU (Group A2). Arrhythmia, epidural anesthesia, and the amount of intraoperative infusion amount were significantly higher, and the percentage of women significantly lower, in Group A1 (vs Group A2). Postoperative ICU and hospital stays and the ICU costs were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Tracheal tube extubation on the day of abdominal aortic replacement surgery resulted in better postoperative course and lower costs than when extubation occurred later. Patients extubated in the operating room or the ICU on the day of surgery had similar postoperative courses and costs.

Cost-effectiveness of supervised exercise, stenting, and optimal medical care for claudication: results from the Claudication: Exercise Versus Endoluminal Revascularization (CLEVER) trial.

BACKGROUND: Both supervised exercise (SE) and stenting (ST) improve functional status, symptoms, and quality of life compared with optimal medical care (OMC) in patients with claudication. The relative cost-effectiveness of these strategies is not well defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Claudication: Exercise Versus Endoluminal Revascularization (CLEVER) study randomized patients with claudication due to aortoiliac stenosis to a 6-month SE program, to ST, or to OMC. Participants who completed 6-month follow-up (n=98) were included in a health economic analysis through 18 months. Costs were assessed using resource-based methods and hospital billing data. Quality-adjusted life-years were estimated using the EQ-5D. Markov modeling based on the in-trial results was used to explore the impact of assumptions about the longer term durability of observed differences in quality of life. Through 18 months, mean healthcare costs were $5178, $9804, and $14 590 per patient for OMC, SE, and ST, respectively. Measured quality-adjusted life-years through 18 months were 1.04, 1.16, and 1.20. In our base case analysis, which assumed that observed differences in quality of life would dissipate after 5 years, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $24 070 per quality-adjusted life-year gained for SE versus OMC, $41 376 for ST versus OMC, and $122 600 for ST versus SE. If the treatment effect of ST was assumed to be more durable than that of SE, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for ST versus SE became more favorable. CONCLUSIONS: Both SE and ST are economically attractive by US standards relative to OMC for the treatment of claudication in patients with aortoiliac disease. ST is more expensive than SE, with uncertain incremental benefit. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov, Unique identifier: NCT00132743.

Peripheral occlusive disease may provide the highest hospital margins despite rising costs.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to review vascular surgical financial trends in a tertiary care setting and to evaluate the impact of a vascular program within a health care system in the face of lower reimbursements and rising costs. METHODS: With use of Current Procedural Terminology codes and diagnosis-related groups, vascular categories of aortic disease, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral occlusive disease (POCD) were identified at an academic tertiary health care center. Hospital margins were calculated for each of the defined categories by Health Quest cost accounting data cross-walked with Current Procedural Terminology codes, date of service, and admitting physician for each year from 2010 to 2012. RESULTS: All categories realized volume growth and a positive margin for the hospital. In comparison of 2010 and 2012, aortic cases showed an overall volume growth of 19%, revenue increase of 31%, and cost increase of 54%, resulting in an overall margin decrease of 7%. Cerebrovascular cases showed a 30% increase in volume growth, revenue increase of 13%, and cost increase of 5%, resulting in a margin increase of 18%. POCD cases showed overall volume growth of 35%, revenue increase of 37%, cost increase of 54%, and a margin increase of 15%. The margin for POCD exceeded the margin for aortic and cerebrovascular cases combined by 77%. CONCLUSIONS: In evaluating a vascular program's fiscal viability, volume-driven POCD was the only category producing growing hospital margins in the face of significant cost increases.

Insurance status predicts acuity of thoracic aortic operations.

OBJECTIVE: Nonelective case status is the strongest predictor of mortality for thoracic aortic operations. We hypothesized that underinsured patients were more likely to require nonelective thoracic aortic surgery because of reduced access to preventative cardiovascular care and elective surgical services. METHODS: Between June 2005 and August 2011, 826 patients were admitted to a single aortic referral center and underwent 1 or more thoracic aortic operations. Patients with private insurance or Medicare (insured group, n=736; 89%) were compared with those with Medicaid or no insurance (underinsured group, n=90; 11%). RESULTS: The proportion of patients requiring nonelective surgery was higher for underinsured than insured patients (56% vs 26%, P<.0001). Multivariable analysis revealed underinsurance to be the strongest independent predictor of nonelective case status (odds ratio [OR], 2.67; P<.0001). Preoperative use of lipid-lowering medications (OR, 0.63; P<.009) or a history of aortic surgery (OR, 0.48; P<.001) was associated with a decreased risk of nonelective operation. However, after adjustment for differences in preoperative characteristics and case status, underinsurance did not confer an increased risk of procedural morbidity or mortality (adjusted OR, 0.94; P=.83) or late death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83, P=.58) when compared with insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: Underinsured patients were at the greatest risk of requiring nonelective thoracic aortic operation, possibly because of decreased use of lipid-lowering therapies and aortic surveillance. These data imply that greater access to preventative cardiovascular care may reduce the need for nonelective thoracic aortic surgery and lead to improved survival from thoracic aortic disease.

Midterm cost and effectiveness of thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus open repair.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) has been rapidly introduced as a primary treatment modality for thoracic aortic diseases with limited data available on midterm to late-term outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective single institution study comparing hospital and midterm outcomes and costs for TEVAR versus open elective repair of descending thoracic aneurysms was conducted. Fifty-seven patients were included between 2005 and 2007 (TEVAR=28; open=29) and were followed until May 2010. RESULTS: Patients in the TEVAR group were older (73.2 versus 62.3 years; p<0.001). Hospital mortality was higher in the open repair group (10.3% versus 3.6%; p=0.611). There was no statistical difference in stroke, paraparesis or paralysis, sepsis, or renal failure; however, a composite major adverse event variable showed a higher complication with open repair versus TEVAR (37.9% versus 14.3%; p=0.043). Mean follow-up was 42.6 months for open repair versus 26.9 for TEVAR (p=0.002). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed the initial survival benefit for TEVAR was lost in less than 6 months; however, the difference did not reach statistical significance during follow-up (log-rank test p=0.232). Mean surveillance imaging costs for a TEVAR patient were $1,800.38 higher than for an open patient at 2 years. Compliance of TEVAR patients with follow-up imaging was 78%, 64%, 50%, and 42% at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively, and was even lower in those not registered in device trials. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the TEVAR group had favorable early outcomes; however, midterm survival was reduced secondary to comorbidities. This study raises concern for the ongoing costs of surveillance imaging in TEVAR as well as patient compliance with follow-up.

Cryopreserved arterial homografts vs silver-coated Dacron grafts for abdominal aortic infections with intraoperative evidence of microorganisms.

OBJECTIVE: The gold standard for the treatment of abdominal aortic infections remains controversial. Cryopreserved arterial homografts and silver-coated Dacron grafts have both been advocated as reasonable grafts. Direct clinical or experimental comparisons between these two treatment options have not been published before. This study compared cryopreserved arterial homografts and silver-coated Dacron grafts for the treatment of abdominal aortic infections in a contaminated intraoperative field. METHODS: From January 2004 to December 2009, 56 patients underwent in situ arterial reconstruction for an abdominal aortic infection. Patients with negative intraoperative microbiologic specimens were excluded. We compared 22 of 36 patients (61%) receiving cryopreserved arterial homografts (group A) vs 11 of 20 (55%) receiving a silver-coated Dacron graft (group B). Primary outcomes were survival and limb salvage; secondary outcomes were graft patency and reinfection. Direct costs of therapy were also calculated. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality was 14% in group A and 18% in group B (P >.99), and 2-year survival rates were 82% and 73%, respectively (P = .79). After 2 years, limb salvage was 96% and 100%, respectively (P = .50), whereas graft patency was 100% for both groups. Major complications were an aneurysmal degeneration in group A and graft reinfection in group B (n = 2). Median direct costs of therapy (in US $) were $41,697 (range, $28,347-$53,362) in group A and $15,531 (range, $11,310-$22,209) in group B (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show comparable effectiveness between cryopreserved arterial homograft and silver-coated Dacron graft in the contaminated operative field with respect to early mortality and midterm survival. Graft-inherent complications, aneurysmal degeneration for homografts, and reinfection for silver graft, were also observed. The in situ arterial reconstruction with homografts is nearly three times more expensive than with silver graft.

Surgical wound infections after vascular surgery: prospective multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: this multicenter prospective observational study defined the incidence and risk factors of surgical wound infections (SWI) after infrarenal aortic and lower limb vascular surgery procedures and evaluated the severity and costs of these infections. METHODS: the study cohort comprised of 184 consecutive patients. Postoperative complications were recorded. The additional costs attributable to SWI were calculated. RESULTS: Eighty-four (46%) patients had critical ischaemia, 81 (45%) patients underwent infrainguinal bypass surgery and 64 (35%) received vascular prosthesis or prosthetic patch. Forty-nine (27%) patients developed SWI. Staphylococcus aureus was the leading pathogen cultured from the wound. Forty-seven of the 49 infected wounds responded to and healed with the treatment. SWI was the cause of one major amputation. Independent predictors for SWI were infrainguinal surgery (OR 7.2, 95% Cl 2.92-17.65, p < 0.001), obesity (OR 6.1, 95% Cl 2.44-15.16, p < 0.001) and arteriography injection site within the operative area (OR 2.5, 95% Cl 1.13-5.48, p = 0.02). The average cost attributable to SWI was 3320 Ä. CONCLUSION: the incidence of SWI after vascular surgery is high. The risk factors for SWI are infrainguinal surgery, obesity and arteriography injection site within the operative area. SWI increases morbidity and costs of operative treatment.

Endovascular procedures for aorto-iliac occlusive disease are associated with superior short-term clinical and economic outcomes compared with open surgery in the inpatient population.

OBJECTIVES: There has been a rapid increase in the number of endovascular procedures performed for peripheral artery disease, and especially aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD). Results from single-center reports suggest a benefit for endovascular procedures; however, these benefits may not reflect general practice. We used a population-based analysis to determine predictors of clinical and economic outcomes following open and endovascular procedures for inpatients with AIOD. METHODS: All patients with AIOD who underwent open and endovascular procedures in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 2004 to 2007, were identified. Independent patient- and provider-related characteristics were analyzed. Clinical outcomes included complications and mortality; economic outcomes included length of stay (LOS) and cost (2007 dollars). Outcomes were compared using χ2, ANOVA, and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: Four thousand, one hundred nineteen patients with AIOD were identified. Endovascular procedures increased by 18%. Patients who underwent endovascular procedures were more likely to be ≥65 years of age (46% vs 37%), female (54% vs 49%), and in the highest quartile of household income (20% vs 16%), all P<.05. Endovascular patients were more likely to be non-elective (41% vs 20%), in the highest comorbidity index group (8% vs 5%), and with iliac artery disease (67% vs 33%), all P≤.05. In bivariate analysis, endovascular procedures were associated with lower complication rates (16% vs 25%), shorter LOS (2.2 vs 5.8 days), and lower hospital costs ($13,661 vs $17,161), all P<.001. In multivariate analysis, endovascular procedures had significantly lower complication rates and cost, and shorter LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular procedures have superior short-term clinical and economic outcomes compared with open procedures for the treatment of AIOD in the inpatient setting. Further studies are needed to examine long-term outcomes and access-related issues.

American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association preoperative assessment guidelines reduce resource utilization before aortic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Methods used for evaluation of cardiac risk before noncardiac surgery vary widely. We evaluated the effect over time on practice and resource utilization of implementing the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines on Preoperative Risk Assessment. METHODS: We compared 102 historical control patients who underwent elective abdominal aortic surgery (from January 1993 to December 1994) with 94 consecutive patients after guideline implementation (from July 1995 to December 1996) and 104 patients in a late after guideline implementation (from July 1, 1997, to September 30, 1998). Resource use (testing, revascularization, and costs) and outcomes (perioperative death and myocardial infarction) were examined. Patients with and without clinical markers of risk for perioperative cardiac complications were compared. RESULTS: The use of preoperative stress testing (88% to 47%; P <.00001), cardiac catheterization (24% to 11%; P <.05), and coronary revascularization (25% to 2%; P <.00001) decreased between control and postguideline groups, respectively. These changes persisted in the late postguideline group. Mean preoperative evaluation costs also fell ($1087 versus $171; P <.0001). Outcomes of death (4% versus 3% versus 2%) and myocardial infarction (7% versus 3% versus 5%) were not significantly different between control, postguideline, and late postguideline groups, respectively. Stress test rates were similar for patients at low risk versus high risk in the historical control group (84% versus 91%; P =.29) but lower for patients at low risk after guideline implementation (31% versus 61%; P =.003). CONCLUSION: Implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cardiac risk assessment guidelines appropriately reduced resource use and costs in patients who underwent elective aortic surgery without affecting outcomes. This effect was sustained 2 years after guideline implementation.

Should the cell saver autotransfusion system be routinely used in elective aortic surgery?

The objective of this study is to identify the aortic surgery procedures in which the use of the Cell Saver autotransfusion system is beneficial in terms of the amount of autologous blood recovered and the reduction in blood bank demands. An evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the system is also presented. Four hundred and thirty-four elective aortic interventions were retrospectively reviewed to examine the use of intraoperative autotransfusion (IAT). Evaluation was made of risk factors, preoperative hematological variables, the volume of IAT-processed reinfused blood, and homologous transfusion requirements over the period of hospitalization. The routine use of the IAT system was cost-effective in the interventions for AAA and TAA. In patients subjected to aortobifemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease, IAT served to alleviate demands on blood bank inventories, although in our center its use led to a slight increase in net cost. The routine use of IAT during unilateral revascularization due to occlusive disease offered no benefits in terms of reduced homologous transfusion requirements or cost-effectiveness.

Aortoiliac stent deployment versus surgical reconstruction: analysis of outcome and cost.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare complication rate, primary patency, and cost of stent deployment with direct surgical reconstruction for the treatment of severe aortoiliac occlusive disease. METHODS: From March 1, 1992, to May 31, 1996, 119 patients receiving treatment for aortoiliac occlusive disease were analyzed after exclusions. Sixty-five patients had stent deployment and 54 patients had surgical reconstruction. Data were evaluated within and between the groups by univariate and multivariate logistic regression, life-table, t-test, and cross tabulation with chi2 analysis. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to demographic features or presenting symptoms (all p values > 0.07). Incidence of procedure-related complications was similar (p = 0.30). However, there were more systemic complications in the surgery group (15 versus 2; RR = 5.5, p < 0.01) and more vascular complications in the stent group (16 versus 3; RR = 12, p < 0.002). Incidence and type of late complications were not appreciably different (all p values > 0.05). Cumulative primary patency rate of bypass grafts was significantly better than stented iliac arteries at 18 months (93% versus 77%), 30 months (93% versus 68%) and 42 months (93% versus 68%); p = 0.002, log rank. Multivariate analysis identified female gender (RR = 4.6, p = 0.03), ipsilateral SFA occlusion (RR = 5.6, p = 0.01), procedure-related vascular complication (RR = 9.7, p = 0.002), and hypercholesterolemia (RR = 5.0, p = 0.02) as independent predictors of bypass graft or stent thrombosis. Mean total hospital cost per limb treated did not differ significantly between surgery and stent deployment groups ($9383 versus $8626, respectively; p = 0.66, t-test). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of severe aortoiliac occlusive disease by surgical reconstruction or stent deployment has a similar complication rate. Mean hospital cost per limb treated is essentially equal. However, cumulative primary patency rate of bypass grafts is superior to stents. Therefore, considering the elements of cost and patency, surgical revascularization has greater value. The benchmark for cost-effective treatment of severe aortoiliac occlusive disease is direct surgical reconstruction.

Intraoperative autologous transfusion during elective infrarenal aortic reconstruction: a decision analysis model.

PURPOSE: The use of intraoperative autologous transfusion devices expanded during the last decade as a result of the increased awareness of transfusion-associated complications. This study was designed to determine whether routine use of an intraoperative autologous transfusion device (Haemonetics Cell Saver [CS]) during elective infrarenal aortic reconstructions is cost-effective ($50,000/QALYs threshold). METHODS: A decision analysis tree was constructed to model all of the complications that are associated with red blood cell replacement during aortic reconstructions for both abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). It was assumed that a unit of CS return (CSR; 250 ml/unit) equaled a unit of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) and that all CS transfusions were necessary. Transfusion requirements (AAA:PRBC = 2.8 +/- 3.2 units, CSB = 3.7 +/- 3.2 units; AIOD:PRBC = 3.1 +/- 3.0 units, CSR = 2.1 +/- 1.7 units) were determined from retrospective review of all elective aortic reconstructions (AAA, N = 63; AIOD, N = 75) from Jan. 1991 to June 1995 in which the CS was used (82.1% of all reconstructions). Risk of allogenic transfusion-related complications (transfusion reaction, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, human immunodeficiency virus, human T-cell lymphotropic virus types I and II) and their associated treatment costs (expressed in dollars and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were obtained from the medical literature, institutional audit, and a consensus of physicians. RESULTS: Routine use of the CS during elective infrarenal aortic reconstructions was not cost-effective in our practice. Use during reconstructions for AAA repairs cost $263.75 but added only 0.00218 QALYs, for a rate of $120,794/QALY. Use during reconstructions for AIOD was even more costly at $356.68 and provided even less benefit at 0.00062 QALYs, for a rate of $578,275/QALY. The sensitivity analyses determined that the routine use of the CS would be cost-effective in our practice only for AAA repairs if the incidence of hepatitis C were tenfold greater than the baseline assumption. The model determined that CS was cost-effective if the CSR exceed 5 units during reconstructions for AAA and 6 units during reconstructions for AIOD. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of the CS during elective infrarenal aortic reconstructions is not cost-effective. The use of the device should be reserved for a select group of aortic reconstructions, including those in which cost-effective salvage volumes are anticipated. Alternatively, the CS should be used as a reservoir and activated as a salvage device if significant bleeding is encountered.

Same-day admissions and other cost-saving strategies for elective aortoiliac surgery.

PURPOSE: We retrospectively analyzed whether same-day admissions and other resource utilization methods for patients undergoing elective infrarenal aortoiliac surgery (AoIS) were safe and cost-effective. METHODS: Morbidity and mortality rates and costs were compared between 71 patients admitted before the day of surgery (group I) and 57 patients admitted the day of surgery (group II) who underwent elective AoIS between July 1, 1992, and December 31, 1995. After January 1, 1994, a concerted effort was made to decrease hospital costs by performing out-patient preoperative assessment, admitting patients the morning of surgery, and planning early discharge through implementation of clinical pathways. Patients were excluded (total, 33; 20%) from analysis if they were admitted before the day of surgery for intravenous hydration (5), optimizing cardiac function (4), or prolonged preoperative antibiotics (2), or if they required emergency surgery (10) or were transferred from another service or hospital (12). After exclusion, there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) between groups I and II in terms of age, sex, race, diabetes, hypertension, pulmonary disease, cardiac disease, renal insufficiency, type of incision (midline or retroperitoneal), indication for surgery (aneurysm or occlusive disease), or inflow site (aorta or common iliac artery). RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups I and II in terms of mortality rate (0%); cardiac (1.4% [1/71] vs 0%), pulmonary (9.9% [7/71] vs 5.3% [3/57]), or renal (1.4% [1/71] vs 0%) complications; or readmission rates within 30 days (5.6% [4/71] vs 5.2% [3/57]), respectively (p > 0.05). There were significant decreases in length of hospital stay (mean, 6.4 vs 11.2 days; p < 0.0001) and hospital cost per patient ($34,198 vs $45,694; p = 0.001) for group II compared to group I, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients who require elective infrarenal aortoiliac surgery can be admitted the day of surgery and undergo early discharge with significant hospital cost savings and without apparent increase in morbidity or mortality rates.