Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Ann Thorac Surg ; 97(5): 1610-5; discussion 1615-6, 2014 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24636706

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines a minimally invasive, left internal mammary artery-left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) bypass with percutaneous intervention of non-LAD vessels for patients with multivessel coronary disease. The financial implications of HCR have not been compared with off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) through sternotomy. METHODS: The contribution margin is a fiduciary calculation (best hospital payment estimate--total variable costs) used by hospitals to determine fiscal viability of services. From 2010 to 2011, 26 Medicare patients underwent HCR at a single United States institution and were compared with 28 randomly selected, contemporaneous Medicare patients undergoing multivessel OPCAB. All HCR patients underwent a robotic-assisted, sternal-sparing, off-pump, left internal mammary artery-LAD anastomosis plus percutaneous intervention to non-LAD vessels. A linear regression model was used to compare fiscal and utilization outcomes of HCR to OPCAB adjusted for hospital length of stay and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score. RESULTS: On regression analysis controlling for overall length of stay and Predicted Risk of Mortality score, the contribution margin (+$8,771, p<0.0001) was greater for HCR than for OPCAB. Despite higher total cost for HCR compared with OPCAB (+$7,026, p=0.001), the total variable cost (+$2,281, p=0.07) was not significantly different. Best payment estimates (+11,031, p<0.0001) and Medicare reimbursements (+$8,992, p=0.002) were higher for HCR than for OPCAB, and there was a reduction in blood transfusion (-1.5 units, p<0.0001), ventilator time (-10 hours, p=0.001), and postoperative length of stay (-1.2 days, p=0.002) for the HCR group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with OPCAB, HCR results in a greater contribution margin for hospitals. This may result from higher reimbursement as well as improved resource utilization postoperatively, which may offset more expensive procedural costs associated with HCR.


Asunto(s)
Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/economía , Costos de Hospital , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/economía , Anastomosis Interna Mamario-Coronaria/economía , Medicare/economía , Anciano , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/métodos , Estudios de Cohortes , Angiografía Coronaria/métodos , Puente de Arteria Coronaria Off-Pump/economía , Puente de Arteria Coronaria Off-Pump/métodos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/economía , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/cirugía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Anastomosis Interna Mamario-Coronaria/métodos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Masculino , Revascularización Miocárdica/economía , Revascularización Miocárdica/métodos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...