Longitudinal Cost of Septal Myectomy Versus Alcohol Septal Ablation for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the postprocedural health care utilization and cost of septal myectomy (SM) and alcohol septal ablation (ASA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, we analyzed de-identified claims data of adult patients undergoing SM and ASA for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2018. We used propensity score weighting to compare the 2-year incidence rates of emergency department visits and rehospitalizations after SM and ASA. RESULTS: We identified 953 patients in total: 660 underwent SM and 293 underwent ASA. There was no difference in the risk (odds ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.8) or frequency (incidence rate ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.5) of emergency department visits, but the annual risk of hospital readmission was 10.8% after SM and 25.9% after ASA during the second postoperative year (P=.004). In those who were ever readmitted, the average length of hospital stay within the first 2 years after ASA was 1.6 times as long as that after SM (incidence rate ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.4). Overall, the 2-year cumulative postprocedural cost was significantly higher after ASA (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with ASA, SM is associated with fewer hospital readmissions and lower 2-year postprocedural health care cost.

Generalizability of the EAST-AFNET 4 Trial: Assessing Outcomes of Early Rhythm-Control Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

Background EAST-AFNET 4 (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial) demonstrated clinical benefit of early rhythm-control therapy (ERC) in patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) and concomitant cardiovascular conditions compared with current guideline-based practice. This study aimed to evaluate the generalizability of EAST-AFNET 4 in routine practice. Methods and Results Using a US administrative database, we identified 109 739 patients with newly diagnosed AF during the enrollment period of EAST-AFNET 4. Patients were classified as either receiving ERC, using AF ablation or antiarrhythmic drug therapy, within the first year after AF diagnosis (n=27 106) or not receiving ERC (control group, n=82 633). After propensity score overlap weighting, Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare groups for the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, stroke, or hospitalization with the diagnoses heart failure or myocardial infarction. Most patients (79 948 of 109 739; 72.9%) met the inclusion criteria for EAST-AFNET 4. ERC was associated with a reduced risk for the primary composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97 [P=0.02]) with largely consistent results between eligible (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76-1.04 [P=0.14]) or ineligible (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-0.98 [P=0.04]) patients for EAST-AFNET 4 trial inclusion. ERC was associated with lower risk of stroke in the overall cohort and in trial-eligible patients. Conclusions This analysis replicates the clinical benefit of ERC seen in EAST-AFNET 4. The results support adoption of ERC as part of the management of recently diagnosed AF in the United States.

Implementation of a multisite, interdisciplinary remote patient monitoring program for ambulatory management of patients with COVID-19.

Established technology, operational infrastructure, and nursing resources were leveraged to develop a remote patient monitoring (RPM) program for ambulatory management of patients with COVID-19. The program included two care-delivery models with different monitoring capabilities supporting variable levels of patient risk for severe illness. The primary objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and safety of a multisite RPM program for management of acute COVID-19 illness. We report an evaluation of 7074 patients served by the program across 41 US states. Among all patients, the RPM technology engagement rate was 78.9%. Rates of emergency department visit and hospitalization within 30 days of enrollment were 11.4% and 9.4%, respectively, and the 30-day mortality rate was 0.4%. A multisite RPM program for management of acute COVID-19 illness is feasible, safe, and associated with a low mortality rate. Further research and expansion of RPM programs for ambulatory management of other acute illnesses are warranted.

Variation in Treatment Practices for Subclinical Hypothyroidism in Pregnancy: US National Assessment.

CONTEXT: Although thyroid hormone replacement may improve outcomes in pregnant women with subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH), the extent to which they receive treatment is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe levothyroxine (LT4) treatment practices for pregnant women with SCH. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large US administrative claims database. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women with SCH defined by untreated TSH 2.5 to 10 mIU/L. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Initiation of LT4 as a function of treating clinician specialty (endocrinology, obstetrics/gynecology, primary care, or other), baseline TSH, patient clinical and demographic factors, and US region. RESULTS: We identified 7990 pregnant women with SCH; only 1214 (15.2%) received LT4. Treatment was more likely in patients with higher TSH, obesity, recurrent pregnancy loss, thyroid disease, and cared for by endocrinologists. Proportion of treated women increased over time; LT4 treatment was twice as likely in 2014 as in 2010. Women in Northeast and West US were more likely to receive LT4 compared with other regions. Asian women were more likely, whereas Hispanic women were less likely, to receive LT4 compared with white women. Endocrinologists started LT4 at lower TSH thresholds than other specialties, and treated women who were more likely to have had recurrent pregnancy loss and thyroid disease than women treated by other clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: We found large variation in the prescription of LT4 to pregnant women with SCH, although most treatment-eligible women remained untreated. Therapy initiation is associated with geographic, clinician, and patient characteristics. This evidence can inform quality improvement efforts to optimize care for pregnant women with SCH.

Adoption of Sacubitril/Valsartan for the Management of Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration approved the use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in July 2015. We aimed to assess the adoption and prescription drug costs of sacubitril/valsartan in its first 18 months after Food and Drug Administration approval. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a large US insurance database, we identified privately insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries who filled a first prescription for sacubitril/valsartan between July 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016. We compared them to patients treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker. Outcomes included adoption, prescription drug costs, and 180-day adherence, defined as a proportion of days covered ≥80%. A total of 2244 patients initiated sacubitril/valsartan. Although the number of users increased over time, the proportion of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients taking sacubitril/valsartan remained low (<3%). Patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan were younger, more often male, with less comorbidity than those taking an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker. Although a majority of prescription costs were covered by the health plan (mean, $328.37; median, $362.44 per 30-day prescription), out-of-pocket costs were still high (mean, $71.16; median, $40.27). By comparison, median out-of-pocket costs were $2 to $3 for lisinopril, losartan, carvedilol, and spironolactone. Overall, 59.1% of patients were adherent to sacubitril/valsartan. Refill patterns suggested that nearly half of nonadherent patients discontinued sacubitril/valsartan within 180 days of starting. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of sacubitril/valsartan after Food and Drug Administration approval has been slow and may be associated with the high cost.