Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Surg Res ; 288: 140-147, 2023 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36966594

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Broader use of donation after circulatory death (DCD) and nonconventional grafts for liver transplant helps reduce disparities in organ availability. Limited data, however, exists on outcomes specific to nonconventional graft utilization in older patients. As such, this study aimed to investigate outcomes specific to conventional and nonconventional graft utilization in recipients > 70 y of age. METHODS: 1-to-3 matching based on recipient sex, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and donor type was performed on patients ≥70 and <70 y of age who underwent liver transplant alone at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 2015 and 2020. Primary outcomes were posttransplant patient and liver allograft survival for recipients greater than or less than 70 y of age. Secondary outcomes included grafts utilization patterns, hospital length of stay, need for reoperation, biliary complications and disposition at time of hospital discharge. RESULTS: In this cohort, 36.1% of grafts came from DCD donors, 17.4% were postcross clamp offers, and 20.8% were nationally allocated. Median recipient ages were 59 and 71 y (P < 0.01). Recipients had similar Intensive care unit (P = 0.82) and hospital (P = 0.14) lengths of stay, and there were no differences in patient (P = 0.68) or graft (P = 0.38) survival. When comparing donation after brain death and DCD grafts in those >70 y, there were no differences in patient (P = 0.89) or graft (P = 0.71) survival. CONCLUSIONS: Excellent outcomes can be achieved in older recipients, even with use of nonconventional grafts. Expanded use of nonconventional grafts can help facilitate transplant opportunities in older patients.


Assuntos
Doença Hepática Terminal , Transplante de Fígado , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos , Humanos , Idoso , Doença Hepática Terminal/cirurgia , Morte , Estudos Retrospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Doadores de Tecidos , Sobrevivência de Enxerto
2.
World Neurosurg ; 166: e664-e671, 2022 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35872133

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) allow spine surgeons to provide relief for patients who suffer from chronic pain due to several disorders, such as failed back surgery syndrome, complex regional pain syndrome, and neuropathy. Despite this, there remains a paucity of data regarding the utilization and reimbursement of SCS. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the monetary and procedural trends of spinal cord stimulators among the Medicare database from 2000 to 2019. METHODS: Medicare Part B National Summary Data files, which are publicly available, were used. These files contain data from the years 2000-2019 on all services billed to Medicare within that time frame. Each service is given a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code and the number of times that service was performed, as well as the total physician Medicare charges and reimbursements for each service annually are included in that data set. The CPT codes for percutaneous and open placement of spinal cord stimulators were identified: 63650 and 63655, respectively. The total allowed services allowed charges and actual payments were isolated from the data set for each year for each CPT code. The total allowed charges and actual payments for the year were then divided by the total allowed services to find and trend the allowed charges and actual payment for each individual service performed for both percutaneous and open placement of spinal cord stimulators. RESULTS: There were 992,372 Medicare-approved total percutaneous spinal cord stimulator operations and 99,736 Medicare-approved total open spinal cord stimulator operations from 2000 to 2019. Medicare paid $1.02 billion (2019 U.S. dollars) in reimbursement to physicians for percutaneous spinal cord stimulator operations and nearly $145 million (2019 U.S. dollars) in reimbursement to physicians for open spinal cord stimulator operations. From the years 2000 to 2019, there was an average 21.9% increase annually in Medicare-approved percutaneous spinal stimulator placement operations and a 18.4% increase annually in Medicare-approved open spinal stimulator placement operations. During this time, there was also an average 8.7% increase annually in Medicare reimbursement per each percutaneous spinal stimulator placement operation and a 9.1% increase annually in Medicare reimbursement per each open spinal stimulator placement operation. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that the number of percutaneous and open procedures have steadily increased from 2000 to 2019. Reimbursement per procedure has also increased steadily over this time. Identifying these trends is important to promote research into costs of these surgeries and ensure adequate resource allocation.


Assuntos
Dor Crônica , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica , Idoso , Current Procedural Terminology , Humanos , Medicare , Medula Espinal , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa