Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation and its implications for modern cardiac electrophysiology: results of an EHRA survey.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) is a treatment option for recurrent ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) in patients with structural heart disease (SHD). The current and future role of STAR as viewed by cardiologists is unknown. The study aimed to assess the current role, barriers to application, and expected future role of STAR. An online survey consisting of 20 questions on baseline demographics, awareness/access, current use, and the future role of STAR was conducted. A total of 129 international participants completed the survey [mean age 43 ± 11 years, 25 (16.4%) female]. Ninety-one (59.9%) participants were electrophysiologists. Nine participants (7%) were unaware of STAR as a therapeutic option. Sixty-four (49.6%) had access to STAR, while 62 (48.1%) had treated/referred a patient for treatment. Common primary indications for STAR were recurrent VT/VF in SHD (45%), recurrent VT/VF without SHD (7.8%), or premature ventricular contraction (3.9%). Reported main advantages of STAR were efficacy in the treatment of arrhythmias not amenable to conventional treatment (49%) and non-invasive treatment approach with overall low expected acute and short-term procedural risk (23%). Most respondents have foreseen a future clinical role of STAR in the treatment of VT/VF with or without underlying SHD (72% and 75%, respectively), although only a minority expected a first-line indication for it (7% and 5%, respectively). Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation as a novel treatment option of recurrent VT appears to gain acceptance within the cardiology community. Further trials are critical to further define efficacy, patient populations, as well as the appropriate clinical use for the treatment of VT.

Cardiology providers' recommendations for treatments and use of patient decision aids for multivessel coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Rates of recommending percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vary across clinicians. Whether clinicians agree on preferred treatment options for multivessel coronary artery disease patients has not been well studied. METHODS AND RESULTS: We distributed a survey to 104 clinicians from the Northern New England Cardiovascular Study Group through email and at a regional meeting with 88 (84.6%) responses. The survey described three clinical vignettes of multivessel coronary artery disease patients. For each patient vignette participants selected appropriate treatment options and whether they would use a patient decision aid. The likelihood of choosing PCI only or PCI/CABG over CABG only was modeled using a multinomial regression. Across all vignettes, participants selected CABG only as an appropriate treatment option 24.2% of the time, PCI only 25.4% of the time, and both CABG or PCI as appropriate treatment options 50.4% of the time. Surgeons were less likely to choose PCI over CABG (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03, 0.59) or both treatments over CABG only (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.03, 0.34) relative to cardiologists. Overall, 65% of participants responded they would use a patient decision aid with each vignette. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consensus on the appropriate treatment options across cardiologists and surgeons for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Treatment choice is influenced by both patient characteristics and clinician specialty.

Intermittent claudication treatment patterns in the commercially insured non-Medicare population.

OBJECTIVE: Despite published guidelines and data for Medicare patients, it is uncertain how younger patients with intermittent claudication (IC) are treated. Additionally, the degree to which treatment patterns have changed over time with the expansion of endovascular interventions and outpatient centers is unclear. Our goal was to characterize IC treatment patterns in the commercially insured non-Medicare population. METHODS: The IBM MarketScan Commercial Database, which includes more than 8 billion US commercial insurance claims, was queried for patients newly diagnosed with IC from 2007 to 2016. Patient demographics, medication profiles, and open/endovascular interventions were evaluated. Time trends were modeled using simple linear regression and goodness-of-fit was assessed with coefficients of determination (R2). A patient-centered cohort sample and a procedure-focused dataset were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 152,935,013 unique patients in the database, there were 300,590 patients newly diagnosed with IC. The mean insurance coverage was 4.4 years. The median patients age was 58 years and 56% of patients were male. The prevalence of statin use was 48% among patients at the time of IC diagnosis and increased to 52% among patients after one year from diagnosis. Interventions were performed in 14.3%, of whom 20% and 6% underwent two or more and three or more interventions, respectively. The median time from diagnosis to intervention decreased from 230 days in 2008 days to 49 days in 2016 (R2 = 0.98). There were 16,406 inpatient and 102,925 ambulatory interventions for IC over the study period. Among ambulatory interventions, 7.9% were performed in office-based/surgical centers. The proportion of atherectomies performed in the ambulatory setting increased from 9.7% in 2007 to 29% in 2016 (R2 = 0.94). In office-based/surgical centers, 57.6% of interventions for IC used atherectomy in 2016. Atherectomy was used in ambulatory interventions by cardiologists in 22.6%, surgeons in 15.2%, and radiologists in 13.6% of interventions. Inpatient atherectomy rates remained stable over the study period. Open and endovascular tibial interventions were performed in 7.9% and 7.8% of ambulatory and inpatient IC interventions, respectively. Tibial bypasses were performed in 8.2% of all open IC interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There has been shorter time to intervention in the treatment of younger, commercially insured patients with IC, with many receiving multiple interventions. Statin use was low. Ambulatory procedures, especially in office-based/surgical centers, increasingly used atherectomy, which was not observed in inpatient settings.

Contemporary Trends in Physician Utilization Rates of CEA and CAS for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Carotid revascularization for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS) has become increasingly controversial in the past few decades as the best medical therapy has improved. The aim of this study was to assess and define contemporary trends in the rate of carotid revascularization procedures for ACAS in the United States and to characterize outlier physicians performing a higher rate of asymptomatic revascularization compared to their peers. METHODS: We used 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify all patients who were newly diagnosed with ACAS between 01/2011-06/2018. Patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, those with prior carotid revascularization, and surgeons who performed ≤10 CEAs during the study period were excluded. We used a hierarchical multivariable logistic regression model to evaluate patient and physician characteristics associated with undergoing a carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stent procedure within 3 months after the initial diagnosis of ACAS. We also assessed temporal trends in carotid revascularization rates over time using the Cochran-Armitage Trend Test. RESULTS: Overall, 795,512 patients (median age 73.9 years, 50.9% male, 87.6% white) had a first-time diagnosis of ACAS during the study period, of which 23,481 (3.0%) underwent carotid revascularization within 3 months. There was a significant decline in overall carotid artery revascularization rates over time (2011: 3.2% vs. 2018: 2.1%; P < 0.001). The median and mean physician-specific carotid revascularization rates were 2.0% (IQR 0.0%-6.3%) and 4.7% ± 7.1%, respectively. Three-hundred and fifty physicians (5.2%) had carotid revascularization rates ≥19%, which was more than 2 standard deviations above the mean. After adjusting for patient-level characteristics, physician-level variables associated with carotid revascularization for newly diagnosed ACAS included male sex (adjusted OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.35-1.89), more years in practice (≥31 vs. <10 years, aOR 1.64, 95% CI 1.32-2.04), rural practice location (aOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.52), Southern region practice location (versus Northeast, aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.39-1.69), and lower volume of ACAS patients (lower versus upper tertile, aOR 2.62, 95% CI 2.39-2.89). Cardiothoracic surgeons had a 1.52-fold higher odds of carotid revascularization compared to vascular surgeons (95% CI 1.36-1.68), whereas cardiologists and radiologists had lower intervention rates (both, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The current early revascularization rate for newly diagnosed ACAS is <5% among proceduralists in the United States, and has been decreasing steadily since 2014. There are particular physician-level characteristics that are associated with higher rates of carotid revascularization that cannot be fully contextualized without high-level contemporary outcomes data to guide decision making in ACAS.

Online Ratings for Vascular Interventional Proceduralists Vary by Physician Specialty.

BACKGROUND: Multiple specialties offer vascular interventional care, creating potential competition for referrals and procedures. At the same time, patient/consumer ratings have become more impactful for physicians who perform vascular procedures. We hypothesized that there are differences in online ratings based on specialty. METHODS: We used official program lists from the Association for Graduate Medical Education to identify institutions with training programs in integrated vascular surgery (VS), integrated interventional radiology (IR), and interventional cardiology (IC). Faculty providers were identified in each specialty at these institutions. A standardized search was performed to collect online ratings from Vitals.com, Healthgrades.com, and Google.com as well as from online demographics. Between specialty differences were analyzed using chi-squared and analysis of variance tests as appropriate. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify factors associated with review volume and star rating. RESULTS: A total of 1,330 providers (n = 454 VS, n = 451 IR, n = 425 IC) were identified across 47 institutions in 27 states. VS (55.5%-69.4%) and IC (63.8%-71.1%) providers were significantly more likely to have reviews than IR (28.6%-48.8%) providers across all online platforms (P < 0.001 for all websites). Across all platforms, IC providers were rated significantly higher than VS and IR providers. Multivariable regression showed that provider specialty and additional time in practice were associated with higher review volume. In addition to specialty, review volume was associated with star rating as those physicians with more reviews tended to have a higher rating. CONCLUSIONS: On average, vascular surgeons have more reviews and are more highly rated than interventional radiologists but tend to have fewer reviews and lower ratings than interventional cardiologists. VS providers may benefit from encouraging patients to file online reviews, especially in competitive markets.

Outpatient healthcare utilization 30 days before and after hospitalization for heart failure in France: Contribution of the national healthcare database (Systèmenationaldesdonnéesdesanté).

BACKGROUND: Guidelines have been published concerning patient management after hospitalization for heart failure. The French national healthcare database (Systèmenationaldesdonnéesdesanté; SNDS) can be used to compare these guidelines with real-life practice. AIMS: To study healthcare utilization 30 days before and after hospitalization for heart failure, and the variations induced by the exclusion of institutionalized patients, who are less exposed to outpatient healthcare utilization. METHODS: We identified the first hospitalization for heart failure in 2015 of adult beneficiaries of the health insurance schemes covering 88% of the French population, who were alive 30 days after hospitalization. Outpatient healthcare utilization rates during the 30 days after hospitalization and the median times to outpatient care, together with their interquartile ranges, were described for all patients, and for a subgroup excluding institutionalized patients. RESULTS: Among the 104,984 patients included (mean age 79 years; 52% women), 74% were non-institutionalized (mean age 78 years; 47% women). The frequencies of at least one consultation after hospitalization and the median times to consultation were 69% (total sample) vs. 78% (subgroup excluding institutionalized patients) and 8 days (interquartile range 3; 16) vs. 7 days (3; 15) for general practitioners, 20% vs. 21% and 14 days (7; 23) vs. 16 days (9; 24) for cardiologists and 58% vs. 69% and 3 days (1; 9) vs. 2 days (1; 7) for nurses, with reimbursement of diuretics in 77% vs. 86%, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers in 48% vs. 55% and beta-blockers in 55% vs. 63%. Departmental variations, excluding institutionalized patients, were large: general practice consultations (interquartile range 74%; 83%), cardiology consultations (11%; 23%) and nursing care (68%; 77%). CONCLUSIONS: Low outpatient healthcare utilization rates, long intervals to first healthcare utilization and departmental variations indicate a mismatch between guidelines and real-life practice, which is accentuated when including institutionalized patients.

Trends in Percutaneous Embolization Procedures by Radiologists and Other Specialists.

PURPOSE: To evaluate utilization trends in percutaneous embolization among radiologists and nonradiologist providers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Part B fee-for-service databases for 2005-2016 were used to evaluate percutaneous embolization codes. Six codes describing embolization procedures were reviewed. Physician providers were grouped as radiologists, vascular surgeons, cardiologists, nephrologists, other surgeons, and all others. RESULTS: The total volume of Medicare percutaneous embolization procedures increased from 20,262 in 2005 to 45,478 in 2016 (+125%). Radiologists performed 13,872 procedures in 2005 (68% of total volume) and 33,254 in 2016 (73% of total volume), a 140% increase in volume. While other specialists also increased the number of cases performed from 2005 to 2016, radiologists strongly predominated, performing 87% of arterial and 30% of venous procedures in 2016, more than any other single specialty. In 2014 and 2015, a sharp increase in venous embolization cases performed by nonradiologists preceded a sharp decrease in 2016, likely the result of complicated billing codes for venous procedures. Radiologists maintained a steady upward trend in the number of cases they performed during those years. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of percutaneous embolization procedures performed in the Medicare population increased from 2005 to 2016, reflecting a trend toward minimally invasive intervention. In 2016, radiologists performed nearly 10 times more arterial embolization procedures than the second highest specialty and more venous embolization procedures than any other single specialty.

The good, bad and the ugly of the Acute Venous Thrombosis: Thrombus Removal with Adjunctive Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis trial from the viewpoint of clinicians.

OBJECTIVE: Acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) can be complicated by post-thrombotic syndrome, which is associated with significant morbidity and healthcare costs. The Acute Venous Thrombosis: Thrombus Removal with Adjunctive Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis (ATTRACT) was the largest and most controversial randomized controlled trial evaluating the use of pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for the prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome after acute DVT. This study aimed to evaluate clinicians' opinion on the ATTRACT trial and its impact on clinical practice. METHODS: An online survey consisting of 10 core multiple choice items and a maximum of five follow-up open-ended questions was delivered to vascular surgeons, interventional radiologists, hematologists, and interventional cardiologists affiliated with 10 international societies between April 23 and July 1, 2019. Clinicians' views on the main limitations of the ATTRACT trial, its impact on patient selection for thrombolysis and the need for a new trial were evaluated. RESULTS: Out of 15,650 contacted clinicians, 451 (3%) completed the survey, with 74% vascular surgeons, 24% interventional radiologists, 2% hematologists, and 0.2% interventional cardiologists. The majority of respondents (79%) were aware of the results of the ATTRACT trial before completing the survey and routinely performed pharmacomechanical CDT (PCDT) in their centers (70%). Only 20% of clinicians considered ATTRACT to be a well-designed and well-performed trial. The inclusion of femoropopliteal DVT was reported as the main limitation of the trial by 55% of respondents. Despite half of the participating clinicians reporting no change in their clinical practice, equal number of clinicians (14%) were encouraged and discouraged from treating iliofemoral DVT. More than one-half of the respondents thought that the use of PCDT would be defensible in a court of law despite the increased risk of bleeding reported in the study. Nearly two-thirds of participating clinicians recommended performing a trial limited to iliofemoral DVT, with a follow-up period of 5 years, quality of life as the primary outcome measure, and standardization of thrombolysis protocol across the trial sites. CONCLUSIONS: ATTRACT failed to provide the long-awaited indisputable evidence on the use of PCDT. Surveyed clinicians were aware of the limitations of this trial and the need for further evidence on the subject.

Recent Trends in Clinical Setting and Provider Specialty for Endovascular Peripheral Artery Disease Interventions for the Medicare Population.

PURPOSE: To describe national trends in peripheral endovascular interventions by physician specialty, anatomic segment of disease, and clinical location of service. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify claims for peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) in 2011-2017 Physician Supplier Procedure Summary master files, which contain 100% Part B Medicare billing. Market share was defined as enrollment-adjusted proportion of billed PVI services for each specialty. Annual volume of billed services was additionally evaluated by clinical location (inpatient, outpatient, office-based laboratories) and anatomic segment of disease (iliac, femoral/popliteal, infrapopliteal). RESULTS: Aggregate PVI claims increased 31.3%, from 227,091 in 2011 to 298,127 in 2017. Annual market share remained relatively stable for all specialties: surgery, 48.3%-49.6%; cardiology, 37.2%-35.1%; radiology, 12.8%-13.3%. Accounting for Medicare enrollment, the volume of iliac interventions decreased by 18% over the study period, while femoral/popliteal interventions increased modestly (+7.5%) and infrapopliteal interventions increased (+46%). The greatest proportional increase in infrapopliteal claims occurred among radiologists (surgeons +40.4%, cardiologists +32.1%, radiologists +106.6%). Adjusting for enrollment, claims from office-based laboratories increased substantially (+305.7%), while hospital-based billing decreased (inpatient -25.7%, outpatient -12.9%). Office-based laboratory utilization increased dramatically with all specialties (surgery +331.8%, cardiology +256.0%, radiology +475.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of PVIs continues to increase, while specialty market shares have stabilized since 2011, leaving surgeons and cardiologists as the major providers of endovascular peripheral artery disease care. The greatest relative increases are occurring in infrapopliteal interventions and office-based laboratory procedures, where radiologist involvement has increased dramatically.

Physician and Hospital Utilization of P2Y12 Inhibitors in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the United States: A Study From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's Research to Practice Initiative.

Background Ticagrelor and prasugrel are potent P2Y12 inhibitors with superior efficacy compared with clopidogrel among patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), though use in recent practice is not well described. In this retrospective study, we assessed trends, predictors, and variation in use of P2Y12 inhibitors in patients with STEMI in the United States. Methods and Results We identified 169 505 STEMI patients in the Chest Pain-Myocardial Infarction Registry from October 2013 through March 2017. We determined national utilization rates of P2Y12 inhibitors at discharge, patient predictors for each medication, and variation in use between hospitals. In a subset of 9655 Medicare patients ≥65 years old, we compared 1-year adjusted risks of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and bleeding based on hospital quartile of potent P2Y12 inhibitor use. Rates of ticagrelor use increased from 18.0% to 44.0%, while rates of prasugrel and clopidogrel use decreased from 24.6% to 13.5% and 57.4% to 42.6%, respectively. Prior percutaneous coronary intervention was the strongest clinical predictor for use of ticagrelor (adjusted odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.09-1.18]) and prasugrel (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.21-1.34]) compared with clopidogrel. Predictors of clopidogrel use included no insurance, insurance with Medicare or Medicaid, and features associated with higher bleeding risk. The median hospital usage rate for newer P2Y12 inhibitors was 51.3% (interquartile range, 35.0%-65.9%), with substantial variation between hospitals (adjusted median odds ratio, 2.92 [95% CI, 2.77-3.10]). Among patients ≥65 years old, there were no differences in adjusted 1-year risks of adverse outcomes across hospital quartiles of potent P2Y12 inhibitor use. Conclusions Almost one-half of STEMI patients by 2017 were discharged on ticagrelor while far fewer received prasugrel. Patient characteristics are associated with P2Y12 inhibitor selection, though substantial hospital variation exists. Identifying barriers to use of more potent P2Y12 inhibitors may improve patient-centered decision-making for STEMI patients.

Comprehensive National Institutes of Health funding analysis of academic cardiac surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: To determine trends in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for cardiac surgeons, hypothesizing they are at a disadvantage in obtaining funding owing to intensive clinical demands. METHODS: Cardiac surgeons (adult/congenital) currently at the top 141 NIH-funded institutions were identified using institutional websites. The NIH funding history for each cardiac surgeon was queried using the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER). Total grant funding, publications, and type was collected. Academic rank, secondary degrees, and fellowship information was collected from faculty pages. Grant productivity was calculated using a validated grant impact metric. RESULTS: A total of 818 academic cardiac surgeons were identified, of whom 144 obtained 293 NIH grants totaling $458 million and resulting in 6694 publications. We identified strong associations between an institution's overall NIH funding rank and the number of cardiac surgeons, NIH grants to cardiac surgeons, and amount of NIH funding to cardiac surgeons (P < .0001 for all). The majority of NIH funding to cardiac surgeons is concentrated in the top quartile of institutions. Cardiac surgeons had a high conversion rates from K awards (mentored development awards) to R01s (6 of 14; 42.9%). Finally, we demonstrate that the rate of all NIH grants awarded to cardiac surgeons has increased, driven primarily by P and U (collaborative project) grants. CONCLUSIONS: NIH-funded cardiac surgical research has had a significant impact over the last 3 decades. Aspiring cardiac surgeon-scientists may be more successful at top quartile institutions owing to better infrastructure and mentorship.

Factors associated with the rates of coronary artery bypass graft and percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Korea has seen a rapid increase in the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the ratio of PCI to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) the highest in the world. This study was performed to examine the factors associated with the rates of CABG and PCI. METHODS: The data were acquired from the National Health Insurance database in Korea in 2013. We calculated the age-sex standardized rates of CABG and PCI. We examined the factors associated with the CABG and PCI rates by performing a regression analysis. RESULTS: The rate of CABG showed a negative association with the deprivation index score, and other factors, such as the number of providers or hospital beds, did not show any significant association with the CABG rate. The rate of PCI had a strong negative association with the number of cardiothoracic surgeons and a strong positive association with the number of hospital beds. CONCLUSIONS: The positive association between the PCI rate and the number of hospital beds suggests that the use of PCI may be driven by the supply of beds, and the inverse association between the PCI rate and the number of cardiothoracic surgeons indicates the overuse of PCI due to lack of the providers of CABG. Policy measures should be taken to optimize the use of revascularization procedures, the choice of which should primarily be based on the patient's need.

Evaluation of the Statewide Variability in the Current Role of Different Specialties in Lower Extremity Endovascular Revascularization for Medicare Beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the statewide variability in the role of different specialties in lower extremity endovascular revascularization (LEER) and associated submitted charges of care and actual reimbursement for Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: The 2015 "Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier" data includes provider-specific information regarding the type of service, submitted average charges of care, and actual average Medicare reimbursements per Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) code per provider. All HCPCS codes related to LEER were identified. The role of vascular surgery (VS), interventional cardiology (IC), and interventional radiology (IR) in each HCPCS-specific intervention was investigated. RESULTS: In 2015, 4113 providers submitted claims for iliac (n = 13,659), femoropopliteal (n = 52,344), and tibioperoneal (n = 32,688) endovascular revascularizations. In the facility setting, VS performed most of these procedures (52%), followed by IC (32%) and IR (8%). In the outpatient-based lab setting, the proportions were 46%, 36%, and 13%, respectively. Substantial statewide variability in the role of different specialties in LEER was noted. In Maine, Vermont, and Hawaii, all facility claims were submitted by VS, while more than 70% of the claims in Arizona and Utah were submitted by IC. The highest share of LEER for IR was observed in Montana and North Dakota (50%). There was substantial statewide variability in the submitted charges. CONCLUSION: Currently, less than 10% of LEER procedures are being performed by IR. The statewide variability in the submitted charges of care by providers and actual reimbursement for Medicare beneficiaries were investigated in this study.

Impact of provider characteristics on use of endovenous ablation procedures in Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the association between provider characteristics and intensity of endovenous therapy (EVT) utilization in the Medicare population. METHODS: The Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use Files (2012-2014) were queried to construct a database of providers performing EVT using laser or radiofrequency ablation techniques for treatment of lower extremity venous reflux. A utilization index (UI; EVT procedure per patient treated per year) was calculated for each provider, and median services per county were determined. Provider specialty, geographic region, and site of service (facility vs outpatient) were determined for each patient. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify provider characteristics associated with a UI above the 75th percentile. RESULTS: There were 6599 providers who performed EVT in 405,232 Medicare beneficiaries during the study period. Intensity of EVT use by providers was assessed by the calculated UI, the average number of EVT procedures performed in treated patients per year (range, 1-4). Vascular surgeons had the lowest UI among all provider specialties (1.32). By multivariate analysis, the likelihood of a provider's UI being >1.8 (top 25%) was associated with provider training in a field other than surgery, cardiology, or radiology (odds ratio [OR], 3.35; 2.74-4.09); services performed in an outpatient setting (OR, 2.62; 1.97-3.47); and providers who perform high annual volume of EVT (OR, 8.68; 7.59-9.91). A high annual volume provider was defined as one whose EVT volume was ≥75th percentile nationally. CONCLUSIONS: There is great variation in intensity of vein ablation procedures performed on Medicare beneficiaries by geographic location and provider specialty. High-volume providers and those with a specialty not traditionally associated with the management of lower extremity chronic venous disease are more likely to perform more EVT procedures per patient.

Perspective and practice of surgical atrial fibrillation ablation: an international survey of cardiac surgeons.

AIMS: Despite recommendations stating that surgical atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is reasonable for patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery for other indications, the clinical impact of this procedure remains unclear. We aimed to describe surgeons' practices and perceptions of this procedure. METHODS AND RESULTS: We built a self-administered survey in collaboration with content and methodology experts. We surveyed 268 cardiac surgeons from 80 centres in 18 countries. The response rate was 76% (n = 204/276), 49% from North America, 39% Europe, and 12% other regions. Respondents performed a median 10 [interquartile range (IQR) 4-30] AF ablation procedures/year, with marked variation in proportions of patients with AF considered for ablation (median 25%, IQR 10-61). 94% and 80% of surgeons respectively, thought symptomatic and asymptomatic patients benefit from ablation. Surgeons estimated the added major complication rate of concomitant AF ablation at 16% [median (IQR) 7-25]. Of participating surgeons, 61% believed that evidence supported surgical AF ablation reducing the incidence of thrombo-embolic complications, and 46% modified anticoagulation decision-making based on whether they performed AF ablation. During coronary artery bypass grafting, isolated pulmonary vein isolation was the most commonly performed lesion set (70%), whereas complete left atrial ablation (46%) and biatrial ablation (44%) were favoured with valve surgery. CONCLUSION: In a multinational group of academic surgeons, surgical AF ablation utilization appears variable, and average case volumes are low. Despite no evidence to that effect, the majority believe that ablation reduces AF-related thrombo-embolic risk of patients. Reported practice patterns suggest clinical equipoise; a definitive trial appears feasible based on respondent willingness to participate.

Reduction in exposure of interventional cardiologists to ionising radiation over a 10-year period.

Exposure of operators to ionising radiation in interventional cardiology has likely diminished, but data confirming the magnitude of the reduction are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare the dose of radiation received by interventional cardiology operators at 11 years interval (2006 vs 2017). The study population comprised all interventional coronary procedures performed by a single operator in one catheterization laboratory (cathlab) of a large university hospital in north-eastern France. Exposure was compared between two periods, namely period 1 (from October 2005 to March 2006) and period 2 (from March 2017 to June 2017). The primary endpoint was the dose of radiation received by the operator, measured using an electronic dosimeter placed on the operator's left arm. In 2017, the dose of radiation received by the operators was, on average, 95% lower than the dose received in 2006 (p < 0.0001), even though the average fluoroscopy time increased by 73% over the same period (p < 0.0001). By multivariable analysis including body mass index, fluoroscopy time and performance of at least one (1) coronary angioplasty, the reduction in the operator's exposure to radiation remained significant. The dose of radiation received by interventional cardiology operators has decreased by 95% over the last ten years.

Current management and treatment of patients with stable coronary artery diseases presenting to cardiologists in different clinical contexts: A prospective, observational, nationwide study.

Background Stable coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Few studies document the complete sequence of investigation of the overall stable CAD population during outpatient visits or hospitalisation. Aim To obtain accurate and up-to-date information on current management of patients with stable CAD. Methods START (STable coronary Artery diseases RegisTry) was a prospective, observational, nationwide study aimed at evaluating the presentation, management, treatment and quality of life of stable CAD patients presenting to cardiologists during outpatient visits or discharged from cardiology wards. Results Over a 3-month period, 5070 consecutive patients were enrolled in 183 participating centres: 72% managed by a cardiologist during outpatient or day hospital visits and 28% discharged from cardiology wards. The vast majority of patients (87%) received a coronary angiography (86% of patients managed during outpatient visits and 90% during hospitalisation; p < 0.0001). Outpatients more frequently received optimal medical therapy (OMT; i.e. aspirin or thienopyridine, ß-blockers and statins) compared to hospitalised patients (70.2% vs 67.1%; p = 0.03). A personalised diet was prescribed in 58% (60.5% in outpatients and 52.9% in those admitted to hospitals; p < 0.0001), physical activity programmes were suggested in 65% (69.4% and 54.3%; p < 0.0001) and smoking cessation was recommended in 71% of currently smoking patients (73.2% and 65.2%; p = 0.02). Conclusions In this large, contemporary registry, patients with stable CAD discharged from cardiology wards more commonly underwent diagnostic imaging procedures and less frequently received OMT or lifestyle modification programmes compared to patients manged by cardiologists during outpatient visits.