National trends in utilization and postprocedure outcomes for carotid artery revascularization 2005 to 2007

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass 01655, USA.
Journal of vascular surgery: official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter (Impact Factor: 2.98). 02/2011; 53(2):307-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.08.080
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study compared, at a national level, trends in utilization, mortality, and stroke after carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) from 2005 to 2007.
The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for patient discharges with International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for CAS and CEA. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, stroke, hospital charges, and discharge disposition. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate these outcomes by neurologic presentation using χ(2) and multivariable logistic regression.
Of the 404,256 discharges for carotid revascularization, CAS utilization was 66% higher in 2006 than in 2005 (9.3% vs 14%, P = .0004). Crude mortality, stroke, and median charges remained higher for CAS than for CEA; discharge to home was more common after CEA. Results improved from 2005 to 2007. By logistic regression of the total cohort from 2005 to 2006, CAS was independently predictive of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-2.00; P < .0001). Independent predictors of stroke included CAS (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.18-1.73; P < .0001) and symptomatic disease (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 2.06-2.93;P < .0001). Among subgroups based on neurological presentation, regression showed that CAS significantly increased the odds of stroke in asymptomatic patients (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0; P = .0003). Among symptomatic patients, CAS increased the odds of in-hospital death (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.7-5.1, P < .0001) and trended toward significance for stroke (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.8; P = .0569).
Utilization of CAS has increased from the years 2005 to 2007 with some improvements in the outcome. Despite improvements in outcome, resource utilization remains significantly higher for CAS than CEA.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rationale: In 2005, the lung allocation score (LAS) was implemented to prioritize organ allocation to minimize waiting-list mortality and maximize one-year survival. It resulted in transplantation of older and sicker patients without changing one-year survival. Its effect on resource utilization is unknown. Objective: To determine changes in resource utilization over time in lung transplant admissions Methods: Solid organ transplant recipients were identified within the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) data from 2000 to 2011. Joinpoint regression methodology was performed to identify a time point of change in mean total hospital charges amongst lung transplant and other solid organ transplant recipients. Two temporal lung transplant recipient cohorts identified by joinpoint regression were compared for baseline characteristics and resource utilization, including total charges for index hospitalization, charges per day, length of stay, discharge disposition, tracheostomy, and need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Measurements and Main Results: A significant point of increased total hospital charges occurred for lung transplant recipients in 2005, corresponding to LAS implementation, that was not seen in other solid organ transplant recipients. Total transplant hospital charges increased by 40% in the post-LAS cohort [$569,942 ($53,229) vs. $407,489 ($28,360)] along with an increased median length of stay, daily charges, and discharge disposition other than to home. Post-LAS recipients also had higher post-transplant utilization of ECMO (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.56, 3.55) and higher incidence of tracheostomy (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.22, 1.89). Conclusions: LAS implementation is associated with a significant increase in resource utilization during index hospitalization for lung transplant.
    American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 12/2014; 191(3). DOI:10.1164/rccm.201408-1562OC · 11.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In appropriately selected patients with severe carotid stenosis, carotid revascularization reduces ischemic stroke. Prior clinical research has focused on the efficacy and safety of carotid revascularization, but few investigators have considered readmission as a clinically important outcome. The aims of this study were to examine frequency, timing, and diagnoses of 30-day readmission following carotid revascularization; to assess differences in 30-day readmission between patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS); to describe hospital variation in risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRR); and to examine whether hospital variation in the choice of procedure (CEA vs. CAS) is associated with differences in RSRRs. We used Medicare fee-for-service administrative claims data to identify acute care hospitalizations for CEA and CAS from 2009 to 2011. We calculated crude 30-day all-cause hospital readmissions following carotid revascularization. To assess differences in readmission after CAS compared with CEA, we used Kaplan-Meier survival curves and fitted mixed-effects logistic regression. We estimated hospital RSRRs using hierarchical generalized logistic regression. We stratified hospitals into 5 groups by their proportional CAS use and compared hospital group median RSRRs. Of 180,059 revascularizations from 2,287 hospitals, CEA and CAS were performed in 81.5% and 18.5% of cases, respectively. The unadjusted 30-day readmission rate following carotid revascularization was 9.6%. Readmission risk after CAS was greater than that after CEA. There was modest hospital-level variation in 30-day RSRRs (median: 9.5%; range 7.5% to 12.5%). Variation in proportional use of CAS was not associated with differences in hospital RSRR (range of median RSRR across hospital groups 9.49% to 9.55%; p = 0.771). Almost 10% of Medicare patients undergoing carotid revascularization were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. Compared with CEA, CAS was associated with a greater readmission risk. However, hospitals' RSRR did not differ by their proportional CAS use. Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Journal of the American College of Cardiology 04/2015; 65(14):1398-408. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.01.048 · 15.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Extracranial-intracranial (EC-IC) bypass and intracranial stenting (ICS) are both revascularization procedures that have emerged as treatment options for intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD). This study describes and compares recent trends in utilization and outcomes of intracranial revascularization procedures in the United States using a population-based cohort. It also investigates the association of ICS and EC-IC bypass with periprocedural morbidity and mortality, unfavorable discharge status, length of stay (LOS), and total hospital charges. The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for patients with ICAD who underwent EC-IC bypass or ICS during the years 2004-2010. Patient characteristics, demographics, perioperative complications, outcomes, and discharge data were collected. There were 627 patients who underwent ICS and 249 patients who underwent EC-IC bypass. Patients who underwent ICS were significantly older (P < 0.001) with more comorbidities (P = 0.027) than those who underwent EC-IC bypass. Patients who underwent EC-IC bypass experienced higher rates of postprocedure stroke (P = 0.014), but those who underwent ICS experienced higher rates of death (P = 0.006). Among asymptomatic patients, the rates of postprocedure stroke (P = 0.341) and death (P = 0.887) were similar between patients who underwent ICS and those who underwent EC-IC bypass. Among symptomatic patients, however, there was a higher rate of postprocedure stroke in patients who underwent EC-IC bypass (P < 0.001) and a higher rate of death among patients who underwent ICS (P = 0.015). The ideal management of patients with ICAD cannot yet be defined. Although much data from randomized and prospective trials on revascularization have been collected, many questions remain unanswered. There still remain cohorts of patients, specifically patients who have failed aggressive medical management, where not enough evidence is available to dictate decision-making. In order to further elucidate the safety and efficacy of these intracranial revascularization procedures, further clinical trials are needed.
    Surgical Neurology International 01/2014; 5:178. DOI:10.4103/2152-7806.146831 · 1.18 Impact Factor


Available from