Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Influence of heart transplant allocation changes on hospital resource utilization.
Hawkins, Robert B; Scott, Erik; Mehaffey, J Hunter; Strobel, Raymond J; Speir, Alan; Quader, Mohammed; Teman, Nicholas R; Yarboro, Leora T.
Afiliação
  • Hawkins RB; Department of Cardiac Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
  • Scott E; Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.
  • Mehaffey JH; Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.
  • Strobel RJ; Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.
  • Speir A; INOVA Heart and Vascular Institute, Falls Church, Va.
  • Quader M; Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Va.
  • Teman NR; Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.
  • Yarboro LT; Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.
JTCVS Open ; 13: 218-231, 2023 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37063148
ABSTRACT

Objectives:

The 2018 change in the heart transplant allocation system resulted in greater use of temporary mechanical circulatory support. We hypothesized that the allocation change has increased hospital resource utilization, including length of stay and cost.

Methods:

All heart transplant patients within a regional Society of Thoracic Surgeons database were included (2012-2020). Patients were stratified before and after the transplant allocation changes into early (January 2012-September 2018) and late eras (November 2018-June 2020). Costs were adjusted for inflation and presented in 2020 dollars.

Results:

Of 535 heart transplants, there were 410 early and 125 late era patients. Baseline characteristics were similar, except for greater lung and valvular disease in the late era. Fewer patients in the late era were bridged with durable left ventricular assist devices (69% vs 31%; P < .0001), biventricular devices (5% vs 1%; P = .047), and more with temporary mechanical circulatory support (4% vs 46%; P < .0001). There was no difference in early mortality (6% vs 4%; P = .33) or major morbidity (57% vs 61%; P = .40). Length of stay was longer preoperatively (1 vs 9 days; P < .0001), but not different postoperatively. There was no difference in median total hospital cost ($132,465 vs $128,996; P = .15), although there was high variability. On multivariable regression, preoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization was the main driver of resource utilization.

Conclusions:

The new heart transplant allocation system has resulted in different bridging techniques, with greater reliance on temporary mechanical circulatory support. Although this is associated with an increase in preoperative length of stay, it did not translate into increased hospital cost.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: JTCVS Open Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: JTCVS Open Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article