Targeted use of postoperative discharge phone calls to reduce early readmission rates.

OBJECTIVES: Postoperative readmissions are common and costly. Office-initiated phone calls to patients shortly after discharge may identify concerns and allow for early intervention to prevent readmission. We sought to evaluate our 30-day readmission rate after the implementation of a standardized postoperative discharge phone call (PODPC) intervention, compared with a historical aggregated cohort. METHODS: From July 2020 to 21, postoperative patients were prospectively identified at 48 hour after discharge. Medical assistants performed PODPCs, administering a survey designed to identify medical/surgical issues that could signify a complication and warrant escalation to a nurse practitioner (NP) for further management. Demographics, comorbidities, and procedure type were obtained retrospectively. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate PODPC responses, frequency of escalation, readmission, and reasons. The electronic medical record identified a historical aggregated cohort (July 2018 to 2019) and the 30-day readmission rate. A χ2 analysis was used to compare readmission rates between the preintervention historical and PODPC intervention groups. Predictors of 30-day readmission were modeled with multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 411 PODPCs conducted, 106 patients (26%) reported not feeling well; having concerns. Eighty-four PODPCs (20%) triggered escalation to a NP; of these, 60 patients (71%) were counseled over the phone by an NP, 16 (19%) were brought into clinic, 6 (7%) were sent to the emergency department, and 2 (2%) did not answer the NP call. Of 411 patients, 17% (n = 68) were readmitted within 30 days. Comparatively, the historical aggregated cohort readmission rate was significantly higher at 28% (n = 346; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-3.65; P = .046), and feeling run down; having difficulty with movement; needing assistance for most activities (OR, 3.94; 95% CI, 2.09-7.43; P < .0001) were predictive of 30-day readmission when controlling for procedure type. CONCLUSIONS: Although readmissions remained common (>15%), being in the intervention cohort was associated with a significantly lower readmission rate compared with the historical aggregated cohort. One-fifth of PODPCs identified a concern; however, >90% of these could be managed by an NP by phone or in clinic. This PODPC intervention holds promise as a viable mechanism for decreasing readmissions.

Successful implementation of a nurse-navigator-run program using natural language processing identifying patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are often identified incidentally on imaging studies. Patients and/or providers are frequently unaware of these AAA and the need for long-term follow-up. We sought to evaluate the outcome of a nurse-navigator-run AAA program that uses a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm applied to the electronic medical record (EMR) to identify patients with imaging report-identified AAA not being followed actively. METHODS: A commercially available AAA-specific NLP system was run on EMR data at a large, academic, tertiary hospital with an 11-year historical look back (January 1, 2010, to June 2, 2021), to identify and characterize AAA. Beginning June 3, 2021, a direct link between the NLP system and the EMR enabled for real-time review of imaging reports for new AAA cases. A nurse-navigator (1.0 full-time equivalent) used software filters to categorize AAA according to predefined metrics, including repair status and adherence to Society for Vascular Surgery imaging surveillance protocol. The nurse-navigator then interfaced with patients and providers to reestablish care for patients not being followed actively. The nurse-navigator characterized patients as case closed (eg, deceased, appropriate follow-up elsewhere, refuses follow-up), cases awaiting review, and cases reviewed and placed in ongoing surveillance using AAA-specific software. The primary outcome measures were yield of surveillance imaging performed or scheduled, new clinic visits, and AAA operations for patients not being followed actively. RESULTS: During the prospective study period (January 1, 2021, to December 30, 2021), 6,340,505 imaging reports were processed by the NLP. After filtering for studies likely to include abdominal aorta, 243,889 imaging reports were evaluated, resulting in the identification of 6495 patients with AAA. Of these, 2937 cases were reviewed and closed, 1183 were reviewed and placed in ongoing surveillance, and 2375 are awaiting review. When stratifying those reviewed and placed in ongoing surveillance by maximum aortic diameter, 258 were 2.5 to 3.4 cm, 163 were 3.5 to 3.9 cm, 213 were 4 to 5 cm, and 49 were larger than 5 cm; 36 were saccular, 86 previously underwent open repair, 274 previously underwent endovascular repair, and 104 were other. This process yielded 29 new patient clinic visits, 40 finalized imaging studies, 29 scheduled imaging studies, and 4 AAA operations in 3 patients among patients not being followed actively. CONCLUSIONS: The application of an AAA program leveraging NLP successfully identifies patients with AAA not receiving appropriate surveillance or counseling and repair. This program offers an opportunity to improve best practice-based care across a large health system.

Evolution of fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair complexity and outcomes at an organized center for the treatment of complex aortic disease.

BACKGROUND: Fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) volume has increased rapidly, with favorable outcomes at centers of excellence. We evaluated changes over time in F/BEVAR complexity and associated outcomes at a single-center complex aortic disease program. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of all F/BEVAR (definition: requiring ≥1 fenestration/branch), procedures performed in an institutional review board-approved registry and/or physician-sponsored investigational device exemption trial (IDE# G130210), were reviewed (11/2010-2/2019). Patients were stratified by surgery date into thirds: early experience, mid experience, and recent experience. Patient and operative characteristics, aneurysm morphology, device types, perioperative and midterm outcomes (survival, freedom from type I or III endoleak, target artery patency, freedom from reintervention), were compared across groups. RESULTS: For 252 consecutive F/BEVARs (early experience, n = 84, mid experience, n = 84, recent experience, n = 84), 194 (77%) company-manufactured custom-made devices, 11 (4.4%) company-manufactured off-the-shelf devices, and 47 (19%) physician-modified devices, were used to treat 5 (2.0%) common iliac, 97 (39%) juxtarenal, 31 (12%) pararenal, 116 (46%) thoracoabdominal, and 2 (0.8%) arch aneurysms. All patients had follow-up for 30-day events. The mean follow-up time for the entire cohort was 589 days (interquartile range, 149-813 days). On 1-year Kaplan-Meier analysis, survival was 88%, freedom from type I or III endoleak was 91%, and target vessel patency was 92%. When stratified by time period, significant differences included aneurysm extent (thoracoabdominal, 33% early experience, 40% mid experience, and 64% recent experience; P < .001) and target vessels per case (four-vessel case, 31% early experience, 39% mid experience, and 67% recent experience; P < .0001). There was no difference, but a trend toward improvement, in composite 30-day events (early experience, 39%; mid experience, 23%; recent experience, 27%; P = .05). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, there was no difference in survival (P = .19) or target artery patency (P = .6). There were differences in freedom from reintervention (P < .01) and from type I or III endoleak (P = .02), with more reinterventions in the early experience, and more endoleaks in the recent period. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing repair complexity, there has been no significant change in perioperative complications, overall survival, or target artery patency, with favorable outcomes overall. Type I or III endoleaks remain a significant limitation, with increased incidence as the number of branch arteries incorporated into the repairs has increased.

Lumbar drain complications in patients undergoing fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: Development of an institutional protocol for lumbar drain management.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar drain placement with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage is an effective adjunct for reducing the risk of spinal cord ischemia in patients undergoing complex aortic aneurysm repair. However, lumbar drain placement is a challenging procedure with potential for significant complications. We sought to characterize complications of lumbar drain placement in a large, single-center experience of patients who underwent fenestrated or branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR). METHODS: All patients who underwent F/BEVAR and attempted lumbar drain placement from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. All lumbar drains were placed by four cardiovascular anesthesiologists who compose the complex aortic anesthesia team. Lumbar drain placement was guided by a set protocol and used whenever the aortic stent graft coverage was planned to extend more proximal than 40 mm above the celiac artery. Details relating to lumbar drain placement, management, and frequency and type of associated complications were characterized. RESULTS: During the study period, 256 patients underwent F/BEVAR, of whom 100 (39%) were planned for lumbar drain placement. Successful placement occurred in 98 (98%) of the cases. All lumbar drains were placed before induction of general anesthesia, using fluoroscopy guidance in 28 cases (28%). The most common level of placement was L4-5 (n = 42 [42%]). The majority (n = 82 [82%]) were left in place ≤48 hours; 21% were removed during the first 24 hours, and 61% were removed between 24 and 48 hours. Nonfunctionality was the most common complication, occurring in 16 (16%) patients. Catheter dislodgment or fracture, CSF leak, and postdural puncture headache were observed in 4 (4%), 7 (7%), and 4 (4%) patients, respectively. The most common bleeding complication was the presence of asymptomatic blood in the CSF (n = 11 [11%]), whereas subarachnoid hemorrhage combined with intraventricular hemorrhage occurred in three patients (3%); none of these patients required surgical drainage or intervention. No infectious complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar drain placement for CSF drainage is a commonly employed adjunct to prevent spinal cord ischemia in F/BEVAR. Our experience demonstrates that lumbar drain placement can be performed successfully but is associated with a significant rate of nonfunctionality and a diverse range of complications that, fortunately, do not commonly have significant long-term sequelae.