Savings associated with surgical aortic valve replacement with a RESILIA tissue valve based on seven-year COMMENCE trial results.

BACKGROUND: Bioprostheses with RESILIA tissue demonstrate a reduction in calcification and improve health outcomes in pre-clinical and clinical studies. Prior economic analyses which relied on 5 years of evidence from the COMMENCE trial demonstrate financial savings for RESILIA tissue valves relative to mechanical valves after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Given the recent release of 7-year COMMENCE data, this economic evaluation updates the estimate for long-run savings of bioprosthetic valves with RESILIA. METHODS: Simulation models estimated disease progression across two hypothetical SAVR cohorts (tissue vs. mechanical) of 10,000 patients each in the US. The primary comparison calculated the SAVR-related expenditures associated with each valve type ($US, 2023). Health outcome probabilities were based on the COMMENCE trial though year 7 and projected for an additional 8 years based on prior studies of tissue and mechanical SAVR. Costs for key outcomes (mortality, reoperation, bleeding, thromboembolism, endocarditis) and anticoagulant monitoring were sourced from the literature. Incidence rates of health outcomes associated with mechanical valves relied on relative risks of tissue valve versus mechanical valve patients. RESULTS: Seven-year savings are $13,415 (95% CI = $10,472-$17,321) per patient when comparing RESILIA versus mechanical SAVR. Projected 15-year savings were $23,001 ($US, 2023; 95% CI = $17,802-$30,421). Most of the 15-year savings are primarily attributed to lower anti-coagulation monitoring costs ($21,073 in ACM savings over 15 years), but lower bleeding cost (savings: $2,294) and thromboembolism-related expenditures (savings: $852) also contribute. Reoperation and endocarditis expenditures were slightly larger in the RESILIA cohort. If reoperation relative risk reverts from 1.1 to 2.2 (the level in legacy tissue valves) after year 7, savings are $18,064. RESILIA SAVR also reduce costs relative to legacy tissue valves. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving RESILIA tissue valves are projected to have lower SAVR-related health expenditures relative to mechanical and legacy tissue valves.

Mortality and resource utilization in surgical versus transcatheter repeat mitral valve replacement: A national analysis.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) has garnered interest as a viable alternative to the traditional surgical mitral valve replacement (SMVR) for high-risk patients requiring redo operations. This study aims to evaluate the association of TMVR with selected clinical and financial outcomes. METHODS: Adults undergoing isolated redo mitral valve replacement were identified in the 2016-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database and categorized into TMVR or SMVR cohorts. Various regression models were developed to assess the association between TMVR and in-hospital mortality, as well as additional secondary outcomes. Transseptal and transapical catheter-based approaches were also compared in relation to study endpoints. RESULTS: Of an estimated 7,725 patients, 2,941 (38.1%) underwent TMVR. During the study period, the proportion of TMVR for redo operations increased from 17.8% to 46.7% (nptrend<0.001). Following adjustment, TMVR was associated with similar odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 0.82, p = 0.48), but lower odds of stroke (AOR 0.44, p = 0.001), prolonged ventilation (AOR 0.43, p<0.001), acute kidney injury (AOR 0.61, p<0.001), and reoperation (AOR 0.29, p = 0.02). TMVR was additionally correlated with shorter postoperative length of stay (pLOS; ß -0.98, p<0.001) and reduced costs (ß -$10,100, p = 0.002). Additional analysis demonstrated that the transseptal approach had lower adjusted mortality (AOR 0.44, p = 0.02), shorter adjusted pLOS (ß -0.43, p<0.001), but higher overall costs (ß $5,200, p = 0.04), compared to transapical. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study, we noted TMVR to yield similar odds of in-hospital mortality as SMVR, but fewer complications and reduced healthcare expenditures. Moreover, transseptal approaches were associated with lower adjusted mortality, shorter pLOS, but higher cost, relative to the transapical. Our findings suggest that TMVR represent a cost-effective and safe treatment modality for patients requiring redo mitral valve procedures. Nevertheless, future studies examining long-term outcomes associated with SMVR and TMVR in redo mitral valve operations, are needed.

Trends and predictors of inflation-adjusted costs in transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in a nationally representative sample.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has become an accepted alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement. We examined the trends and predictors in inflation-adjusted costs of transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical aortic valve replacement. METHODS: National Inpatient Sample identified patients who underwent aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions, codes. Hospitalization costs were inflation-adjusted using the Federal Reserve's consumer price index to reflect current valuation. Outcomes of interest were unadjusted trend in annual cost for each procedure and predictors of in-patient cost. Generalized linear models with a log link function identified predictors of adjusted costs. Interaction terms determined where cost predictors were different by operation type. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2019, the mean annual inflation-adjusted cost of surgical aortic valve replacement increased from $62,853 to $63,743, in contrast to decreasing cost of transcatheter aortic valve replacement from $64,913 to $56,042 ($1,854 per year; P = .004). Significant independent predictors of patient-level cost included operation type (transcatheter aortic valve replacement associated with $9,625 increase; P < .001), incidence of in-hospital mortality ($28,836 increase; P < .001), elective status ($2,410 decrease; P < .001), Elixhauser Index ($995 increase; P < .001), and postoperative length of stay ($2,014 per day increase; P < .001). Compared to discharges with Medicare, discharges with private insurance and Medicaid paid $736 less (P = .004) and $1,863 less (P = .01), respectively. Increasing hospital volume was a significant predictor of decreasing patient level cost (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Annual cost of transcatheter aortic valve replacement has decreased significantly and has been a more cost-effective modality compared to surgical aortic valve replacement since 2017. Predictors of patient-level costs allow for mindful preparation of healthcare systems for aortic valve replacement.

Prevalence, mortality, cost, and disparities in transcatheter mitral valve repair and replacement in cancer patients: Artificial intelligence and propensity score national 5-year analysis of 7495 procedures.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted the first comprehensive evaluation of the therapeutic value and safety profile of transcatheter mitral edge-to-edge repair (TEER) and transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) in individuals concurrently afflicted with cancer. METHODS: Utilizing the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) dataset, we analyzed all adult hospitalizations between 2016 and 2020 (n = 148,755,036). The inclusion criteria for this retrospectively analyzed prospective cohort study were all adult hospitalizations (age 18 years and older). Regression and machine learning analyses in addition to model optimization were conducted using ML-PSr (Machine Learning-augmented Propensity Score adjusted multivariable regression) and BAyesian Machine learning-augmented Propensity Score (BAM-PS) multivariable regression. RESULTS: Of all adult hospitalizations, there were 5790 (0.004%) TMVRs and 1705 (0.001%) TEERs. Of the total TMVRs, 160 (2.76%) were done in active cancer. Of the total TEERs, 30 (1.76%) were done in active cancer. After the comparable rates of TEER/TMVR in active cancer in 2016, the prevalence of TEER/TMVR was significantly less in active cancer from 2017 to 2020 (2.61% versus 7.28% p < 0.001). From 2017 to 2020, active cancer significantly decreased the odds of receiving TEER or TMVR (OR 0.28, 95%CI 0.13-0.68, p = 0.008). In patients with active cancer who underwent TMVR/TEER, there were no significant differences in socio-economic disparities, mortality or total hospitalization costs. CONCLUSION: The presence of malignancy does not contribute to increased mortality, length of stay or procedural costs in TMVR or TEER. Whereas the prevalence of TMVR has increased in patients with active cancer, the utilization of TEER in the context of active cancer is declining despite a growing patient population.

Aortic valve replacement today: Outcomes, costs, and opportunities for improvement.

The introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) just two decades ago has transformed the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. TAVR has not only extended the option of aortic valve replacement to patients deemed ineligible for surgery, it has also demonstrated similar or better short- and intermediate-term clinical outcomes compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at all levels of surgical risk. These benefits have been achieved with similar or lower costs compared with SAVR, at least in the first 1-2 years for intermediate- and low-risk patients. Longer-term data will further inform clinical and shared decision-making. SUMMARY FOR ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENTS: In just over two decades, transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as a frontline approach for appropriately selected patients with severe aortic stenosis. A growing body of evidence documents similar or better clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness for transcatheter compared with surgical aortic valve replacement. Whether the mode is transcatheter or surgical, aortic valve replacement remains underutilized in patients with clear indications for intervention.

Readmission-related outcomes of surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients aged 65 or older with bicuspid aortic valve.

BACKGROUND: There continues to be debate regarding the superiority of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV). We aimed to compare outcomes during readmissions in elderly patients with BAV who underwent SAVR or TAVR. METHODS: Patients 65 years or older with BAV who underwent TAVR or isolated SAVR were identified using the National Readmission Database from 2012 through 2018. We compared outcomes during readmissions within 90 days after discharge from the index surgery. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust the baseline differences. RESULTS: During the study period, 8555 and 1081 elderly patients with BAV underwent SAVR and TAVR, respectively. The number of patients who underwent TAVR went up by 179 % from 2012 to 2018. Propensity score matching yielded 573 patients in each group. A total of 111 (19.4 %) in the SAVR group and 125 (21.8 %) in the TAVR group were readmitted within 90 days after the index surgery (p = .31). The mortality during the readmissions within 90 days was equivalent between the two groups (0.9 % in the SAVR group vs. 3.2 % in the TAVR group, p = .22). However, the median hospital cost was approximately doubled in the TAVR group during the readmission (18,250 dollars vs. 9310 dollars in the SAVR group, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Readmission within 90 days was common in both groups. While the mortality during the readmissions after the surgery was equivalent between the two groups, hospital cost was significantly more expensive in the TAVR group.

Safety, effectiveness and costs of percutaneous mitral valve repair: A real-world prospective study.

AIMS: Percutaneous mitral valve leaflet repair is a treatment option for some people with severe mitral valve regurgitation for whom conventional mitral valve surgery is clinically inappropriate. This study aimed to determine the safety, efficacy, and costs of percutaneous mitral valve leaflet repair, using the MitraClip device in a UK setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, single-armed registry with a follow-up of 2 years that reported a range of procedural, clinical and patient-orientated outcomes. Registry data were linked to routine data sources to allow for more comprehensive follow up concerning mortality and healthcare resource use. The registry received data for 199 mainly elective patients with mixed mitral regurgitation aetiology. A MitraClip device was implanted in 187 patients (94%), with a procedural success rate of 86%, with 8% of patients having a serious in-hospital adverse event (including 5% mortality). Percutaneous mitral valve leaflet repair reduced mitral regurgitation from 100% MR grade ≥ 3+ to 7% at discharge. There were corresponding improvements in New York Heart Association functional class, reducing from 92% (class ≥ 3) at baseline to 18% at 6 weeks. There were significant improvements in generic and disease specific quality of life indicators up to 2 years. The all-cause mortality rate was estimated to be 12.7% (95% CI 7.5 to 17.7%) at 1 year. Percutaneous mitral valve leaflet repair was associated with reduced hospital readmissions and potential cost-savings in post-procedural care. CONCLUSION: This study shows that percutaneous mitral valve leaflet repair using MitraClip is a relatively safe and effective treatment in patients unable to tolerate surgery and has the potential to reduce ongoing healthcare costs in the UK.

Economic assessment of traditional surgical valve replacement versus use of transfemoral intervention in degenerative aortic stenosis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to provide an economic assessment of interventional vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in the context of cost-effectiveness. Aortic stenosis represents the most common form of degenerative valvular heart diseases. As life expectancy increases, an even emerging prevalence is expected. Over decades, surgical replacement was considered as the method of choice. Up to one third of the patients were not eligible for surgery, as their estimated peri-operative risk was too high. In the early 2000s a catheter-based technique has been developed, being an alternative treatment option for patients, considered to be inoperable. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic analysis of current literature was performed from September 2018 to December 2018. All suitable data in the field was obtained from Pubmed and Google/Google scholar. The search terms "TAVI AND costs," "TAVR and costs" and "aortic valve replacement AND costs" was entered in the search field, showing an overall amount of 317 publications. In a next step all obtained publications were screened by expert hand selection. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Recently the Food and Drug Association (FDA) approved transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the low-risk setting. Nevertheless, concerns on the higher price remain. We performed an analysis of current literature on aortic stenosis and economic aspects. Out of 322 screened publications, 7 studies were found eligible by expert hand selection. Based on the predefined payment readiness of the analyzed healthcare system, TAVR appeared to have a slightly better cost effectiveness. Initial results within the early era seemed to be inconsistent. Recent publications showed, TAVR might be of more cost effectiveness when using the newest generation devices and a profound clinical experience is guaranteed. CONCLUSIONS: We assume, that TAVR will not only be the method of choice for the treatment of aortic stenosis in many patients. As the valves are getting cheaper, TAVR might even be superior to conventional heart surgery from an economic point of view.

Economic Analysis and Long-term Follow-up of Distant Referral for Degenerative Mitral Valve Repair.

BACKGROUND: Despite the superiority of mitral valve repair (MVr) over replacement for degenerative disease, repair rates vary widely across centers. Traveling to a mitral reference center (MRC) is 1 way to increase the odds of MVr. This study assessed the economic value (quality/cost) and long-term outcomes of distant referral to an MRC. METHODS: Among 746 mitral surgery patients between January 2011 and June 2013, low-risk patients with an ejection fraction greater than 40% undergoing isolated degenerative MVr were identified and included 26 out-of-state (DISTANT) and 104 in-state patients (LOCAL). Short- and long-term outcomes and institutional financial data (including travel expenses) were used to compare groups. National average and MRC-specific MVr rates, clinical outcomes, and marginal value of quality-adjusted life-years collected from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons database and Medicare estimates were used to perform a nationally representative cost-benefit analysis for distant referral. RESULTS: Age, ejection fraction, operative time, blood transfusions, and annuloplasty ring size did not differ between groups. Median charges were $76,022 for LOCAL and $74,171 for DISTANT (P = .35), whereas median payments (including travel expenses) were $57,795 for LOCAL and $58,477 for DISTANT (P = .70). Short- and long-term outcomes were similar between groups and median follow-up was 7.1 years. Estimated 5-year survival was 97% (96% for LOCAL and 100% for DISTANT; P = .24). Cost-benefit analysis showed a net benefit through distant referral to an MRC ranging from $436 to $6078 to the payer and $22,163 to $30,067 to the patient, combining for an estimated $22,599 to $32,528 societal benefit. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that distant referral to an MRC is achievable and reasonable.

The Safety and Efficacy of Transcatheter Pulmonary Valve Replacement Combined with Electrophysiology Procedures.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) and electrophysiology (EP) procedures. A retrospective review was undertaken to identify TPVR and EP procedures that were concomitantly performed in the cardiac catheterization laboratory at University of Iowa Stead Family Children's Hospital from January 2011 to October 2019. Procedural and follow-up data were compared between patients who underwent TPVR and EP procedures in the same setting to those who received TPVR or EP procedure separately and that were similar in age and cardiac anatomy. A total of 8 patients underwent combined TPVR and EP procedures. One patient was excluded due to lack of adequate control, leaving seven study subjects (57% female; median age at time of procedure 16 years). The median follow-up time was 11.5 months (range 2-36 months). Patients who received combined TPVR and EP had shorter recovery times (combined: median 18.9 h; IQR 18.35-19.5 vs separate: median 27.98 h; IQR 21.42-39.25; p-value 0.031), shorter hospital length of stay (combined: median 27.5 h; IQR 26.47-31.4 vs separate: median 38.4 h; IQR 33.42-51.50; p-value 0.016), and a 51% reduction in total hospital charges (combined: median $171,640; IQR 135.43-219.22 vs separate: median $333,560 IQR 263.20-400.98; p-value 0.016). There were no significant differences in radiation dose or procedure time between the combined and control groups. The median radiation time for those who had the combination procedure was 30.5 min [IQR 29.6-47.9], and the median dose area product was 215 mGy [IQR 158-935]. In conclusion, combining TPVR and EP procedures is feasible, safe, and economically advantageous.

Use of an Aortic Valve Replacement Simulation Model to Understand Hospital Costs and Resource Utilization Associated With Rapid-deployment Valves.

PURPOSE: Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common cause of adult valvular heart disease. In the past decade, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) to treat AS has gained popularity, especially if performed in combination with rapid deployment valves (RDVs), which shorten cross-clamp time (XCT). This study examines specific outcomes and related costs of aortic valve replacement (AVR) before and after the introduction of RDVs. METHODS: We used the AVR simulator, an economic model developed to correlate cost and resource utilization associated with the adoption of RDVs, to compare 2 scenarios: (1) a current scenario based on standard AVR practices and (2) a proposed scenario based on increasing use of RDVs and an MIS approach. Both scenarios involved 3 subgroups of patients treated with (1) conventional AVR, (2) MIS, and (3) AVR combined with a coronary artery bypass graft. The current scenario (status quo) involved patients treated with traditional biological valves, and the proposed scenario involved patients who underwent implantation with an RDV. The AVR simulator was fed with real-world input data to estimate complication rates and resource consumption in the proposed scenario. Real-world input data for this analysis were obtained from patients diagnosed with a symptomatic heart valve disease between 2015 and 2018, at Clinica-San-Gaudenzio, Novara, Italy. Lastly, the AVR simulator estimated hospital savings by comparing the 2 scenarios. FINDINGS: A total of 132 patients underwent implantation with a traditional biological valve, and 107 were treated with a commercial valve system. The RDV was associated with an increase of 52% of patients undergoing MIS, which generated a 6.1-h reduction of XCT and a total savings of €6695. RDVs also reduced intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital ward length of stay (LOS), leading to savings of €677 and €595 per patient, respectively. Mortality and blood transfusions also improved. The savings for the hospital (related to shorter XCT, hospital ward LOS, and ICU LOS) amounted to €144.111. Our findings were consistent with data gathered from our real-word setting, and results of a sensitivity analysis indicate that our findings were robust across different possible situations. IMPLICATIONS: Switching to RDVs and MIS procedures for AVRs was associated with a reduction of costs related to XCT, hospital ward LOS, and ICU LOS. Hospitals can upload literature- and experience-based clinical and cost values to the AVR simulator to estimate a hospital's performance with the introduction of RDVs compared with standard biological valves. This study was not randomized, so more extensive studies could confirm our results in the future.

Sources of Hospital Variation in Postacute Care Spending After Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postacute care is a major driver of cardiac surgical episode spending, but the sources of variation in spending have not been explored. The objective of this study was to identify sources of variation in postacute care spending within 90-days of discharge following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and aortic valve replacement (AVR) and the relationship between postacute care spending and other postdischarge utilization. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of public and private administrative claims for Michigan residents insured by Medicare fee-for-service and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan/Blue Care Network commercial and Medicare Advantage plans undergoing CABG (n=11 208) or AVR (n=6122) in 33 nonfederal acute care Michigan hospitals between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018. Postacute care use was present in 9662 (86.2%) CABG episodes and 4242 (69.3%) AVR episodes, with respective mean (SD) 90-day spending of $4398±$6124 and $3465±$5759. Across hospitals, mean postacute care spending ranged from $3280 to $8186 for CABG and $2246 to $7710 for AVR. Inpatient rehabilitation and skilled nursing facility care accounted for over 80% of the variation spending between low and high postacute care spending hospitals. At the hospital-level, postacute care spending was modestly correlated across procedures and payers. Spending associated with readmissions, emergency department visits, and outpatient facility care was significantly different between low and high postacute care spending hospitals in CABG and AVR episodes. CONCLUSIONS: There was wide hospital variation in postacute care spending after cardiac surgery, which was primarily driven by differential use and intensity in facility-based postacute care. Optimizing facility-based postacute care after cardiac surgery offers unique opportunities to reduce potentially unwarranted care variation.

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with end stage renal disease.

OBJECTIVE: To assess contemporary national trends of comorbidities, outcomes, and health care resource utilization in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR and SAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: The National-Inpatient-Sample was used to study trends in patients with AS and ESRD undergoing TAVR and SAVR between January 2012 and December 2017. Of 12,550 patients, 5,735 underwent TAVR and 6,815 underwent SAVR. Over the years, the utilization of SAVR declined (from 82.0 to 37.7%); and increased for TAVR (from 18.0 to 62.3%; p < .001). Patients receiving TAVR were older (74.6 [9.1] vs. 66.8 years [9.1]), had a higher proportion of females (37.1 vs. 32.5%), Caucasians (68.7 vs. 60.9%) and Asian /Pacific Islanders (3.1 vs. 2.7%; p < .001 for all). The TAVR patients, despite having higher comorbidity burden (anemia, coronary artery disease, chronic pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral vascular disease) had lower inpatient mortality and complications (ST-elevation myocardial infarction, pneumonia, pneumothorax, pulmonary embolism, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, and need for mechanical ventilators and vasopressors). The median length of stay (13.9-6.5 days; p < .001) and cost of stay ($311,538.16 to $255,693.40; p < .001) reduced with TAVR; but remained unchanged with SAVR. Higher proportion of patients was discharged home after TAVR vs. SAVR. CONCLUSION: Among patients with AS and ESRD, despite providing therapy to subjects with higher comorbidity burden, TAVR was associated with lower inpatient mortality, complications, length of stay, cost of care, and higher home disposition rates when compared with SAVR.

Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair versus coronary artery bypass grafting alone for moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation.

OBJECTIVE: The Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network reported that left ventricular reverse remodeling at 2 years did not differ between patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation randomized to coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair (n = 150) or coronary artery bypass grafting alone (n = 151). To address health resource use implications, we compared costs and quality-adjusted survival. METHODS: We used individual patient data from the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network trial on survival, hospitalizations, quality of life, and US hospitalization costs to estimate cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life years. A microsimulation model was developed to extrapolate to 10 years. Bootstrap and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty. RESULTS: In-hospital costs were $59,745 for coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair versus $51,326 for coronary artery bypass grafting alone (difference $8419; 95% uncertainty interval, 2259-18,757). Two-year costs were $81,263 versus $67,341 (difference 13,922 [2370 to 28,888]), and quality-adjusted life years were 1.35 versus 1.30 (difference 0.05; -0.04 to 0.14), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $308,343/quality-adjusted life year for coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair. At 10 years, its costs remained higher ($107,733 vs $88,583, difference 19,150 [-3866 to 56,826]) and quality-adjusted life years showed no difference (-0.92 to 0.87), with 5.08 versus 5.08. The likelihood that coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair would be considered cost-effective at 10 years based on a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100K/quality-adjusted life year did not exceed 37%. Only when this procedure reduces the death rate by a relative 5% will the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fall below $100K/quality-adjusted life year. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of mitral valve repair to coronary artery bypass grafting for patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation is unlikely to be cost-effective. Only if late mortality benefits can be demonstrated will it meet commonly used cost-effectiveness criteria.

Levosimendan in patients with reduced left ventricular function undergoing isolated coronary or valve surgery.

OBJECTIVE: In the Levosimendan in Patients with Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction Undergoing Cardiac Surgery Requiring Cardiopulmonary Bypass (LEVO-CTS) trial, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed between levosimendan and placebo in a broad population of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. In previous studies, the benefits of levosimendan were most clearly evident in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. In a prespecified analysis of LEVO-CTS, we compared treatment-related outcomes and costs across types of cardiac surgical procedures. METHODS: Overall, 563 (66.4%) patients underwent isolated CABG, 97 (11.4%) isolated valve, and 188 (22.2%) combined CABG/valve surgery. Outcomes included the co-primary 4-component composite (30-day mortality, 30-day renal replacement, 5-day myocardial infarction, or 5-day mechanical circulatory support), the 2-component composite (30-day mortality or 5-day mechanical circulatory support), 90-day mortality, low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS), and 30-day medical costs. RESULTS: The 4- and 2-component outcomes were not significantly different with levosimendan and placebo in patients undergoing CABG (15.2% vs 19.3% and 7.8% vs 10.4%), valve (49.0% vs 33.3% and 22.4% vs 2.1%), or combined procedures (39.6% vs 35.9% and 24.0% vs 19.6%). Ninety-day mortality was lower with levosimendan in isolated CABG (2.1% vs 7.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.64), but not significantly different in valve (8.3% vs 2.0%; HR, 4.10; 95% CI, 0.46-36.72) or combined procedures (10.4% vs 7.6%; HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.53-3.64; interaction P = .011). LCOS (12.0% vs 22.1%; odds ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.30-0.76; interaction P = .118) was significantly lower in levosimendan-treated patients undergoing isolated CABG. Excluding study drug costs, median and mean 30-day costs were $53,707 and $65,852 for levosimendan and $54,636 and $67,122 for placebo, with a 30-day mean difference (levosimendan - placebo) of -$1270 (bootstrap 95% CI, -$8722 to $6165). CONCLUSIONS: Levosimendan was associated with lower 90-day mortality and LCOS in patients undergoing isolated CABG, but not in those undergoing isolated valve or combined CABG/valve procedures.

Impact of COPD on outcomes in hospitalized patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation or surgical aortic valve replacement in Spain.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and conventional surgery (SAVR) among hospitalized patients with and without COPD, to compare the in-hospital mortality (IHM), length of hospital stay (LOHS) and cost between patients with COPD undergoing TAVI and SAVR and to identify factors associated to IHM among these patients. BACKGROUND: TAVI would be expected to be less invasive and safer than SAVR among COPD patients. METHODS: We analyzed patients whose medical procedures included TAVI and SAVR included in the Spanish National Hospital Discharge Database, 2014-2015. We stratified analysis by COPD status. Propensity score matching (1:2) was performed to assess the outcomes of TAVI vs. SAVR among COPD patients. RESULTS: We identified 2,141 and 16,013 patients who underwent TAVI (27.60% with COPD) and SAVR (19.31% with COPD) respectively. For TAVI, we found no differences in IHM according to COPD status. Patients undergoing SAVR and suffering COPD had higher IHM than patients without COPD (adj.OR 1.32; 95%CI 1.10-1.58). After propensity score matching, IHM (8.35% vs. 5.83%, p = .040) and LOHS (18.62 days vs. 13.62; p < .001) were higher in COPD patients who underwent SAVR than those who underwent TAVI. CONCLUSIONS: COPD patients undergoing TAVI did not have a worse prognosis compared to non-COPD patients during hospitalization. However, for SAVR, patients with COPD had significantly higher mortality than patients without this condition. COPD patients who underwent SAVR had higher IHM and LOHS than propensity score matched TAVI patients.

Is the MitraClip® procedure profitable in a high-volume French hospital?

BACKGROUND: Mitral regurgitation is the second most frequent valvulopathy managed by surgery in Europe. For patients who have a contraindication to surgery or a high surgical risk, the percutaneous MitraClip® implantation procedure has emerged as a favourable alternative approach, but elevated procedural costs are a medicoeconomic concern. AIM: The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the MitraClip® procedure is profitable in a high-volume French hospital. METHODS: Patients eligible for mitral valve repair with a MitraClip® device, and covered by the French National Health Service, were included retrospectively in this single-centre study between September 2016 and June 2018. Subgroups were considered based on medicoeconomic severity level. The study primary endpoint was the difference between hospital costs and revenues, calculated for each patient. Secondary endpoints included profit based on severity level, breakdown of costs and adverse events during hospitalization. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included in the study. The mean hospital cost and revenue were €30,039±2476 and €30,331±2720 per patient, respectively, resulting in a profit of €292±2039 per patient. The total estimated profit was €6429 for the whole study period. The largest benefits were observed for patients assigned to the higher medicoeconomic severity levels (levels 2 and 3). Profit increased following a reduction in the device cost (€1136±2415 per patient). The price of the device represented 78% of the total costs. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous MitraClip implantation is a financially neutral procedure for a French university hospital, but this depends on patient severity level.

Contemporary trends and outcomes of mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary data on mitral valve (MV) surgery in patients with infective endocarditis (IE) are limited. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify patients with IE who underwent MV surgery between 2003 and 2016. We assessed (a) temporal trends in the incidence of MV surgery for IE, (b) morbidity, mortality, and cost of MV repair vs replacement, and (c) predictors of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The proportion of MV operations involving patients with IE increased from 5.4% in 2003 to 7.3%, and the proportion of MV repair among those undergoing surgery for IE increased from 15.2% to 25.0% (Ptrend < .001). In-hospital mortality was higher in the replacement group (11.3% vs 8.1%; P < .001), and this excess mortality persisted after propensity score matching (11.2% vs 8.1%; P < .001), and in sensitivity analyses excluding concomitant surgery (unadjusted 11.3% vs 4.8%; adjusted 8.5% vs 4.5%; P < .001), and stratifying patients by the time of operation (within 7 days, 11.3% vs 6.8%; P < .001 and >7 days, 11.9% vs 9.1%; P = .012). In the propensity-matched cohorts, shock and need for tracheostomy were more frequent in the replacement group, but rates of stroke, pacemaker implantation, new dialysis, and blood transfusion were similar. Mitral valve repair was, however, associated with shorter hospitalizations, more home discharges, and less cost. In a multivariate regression analysis, age above 70 and chronic dialysis were the strongest predictors of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: Mitral valve repair in IE patients is associated with lower in-hospital mortality, resource utilization, and cost compared with MV replacement.

Sutureless aortic valve replacement in high risk patients neutralizes expected worse hospital outcome: A clinical and economic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) by sutureless prostheses is changing surgeon options, although which patients benefit most, as well as their possible economic impact is still to be defined. METHODS: Perceval-S prosthesis (LivaNova) is reserved, at the documented Institution, for patients at perceived high surgical risk. This retrospective analysis of outcome and resource consumption compared Perceval with other tissue valves. To clarify the comparison, only patients respecting 'instructions-for- use' of Perceval were reviewed. INCLUSION CRITERIA: > 65 years, +/- coronary artery bypass grafting, patent foramen ovale closure or myectomy. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: bicuspid, combined valve or aortic sur- gery. Costs were calculated per patient on a daily basis including preoperative tests, operating costs (hourly basis), disposables, drugs, blood components and personnel. RESULTS: The sutureless group (SU-AVR) had a higher risk profile than the sutured group (ST-AVR). Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cross-clamp times were significantly shorter in SU-AVR (isolated AVR: cross-clamp 52.9 ± 12.6 vs. 69 ± 15.3 min, p < 0.001; CPB 79.4 ± 20.3 vs. 92.7 ± 18.2 min, p < 0.001). Hospital mortality was 0.9% in SU-AVR and nil in ST-AVR, p = 0.489; intubation 7 (IQR 5-10.7) and 7 h (IQR 5-9), p = 0.785; intensive care unit 1 (IQR 1-1) and 1 day (IQR 1-1), p = 0.258; ward stay 5.5 (IQR 4-7) and 5 days (IQR 4-6), p = 0.002; pacemaker 5.7% (6/106) and 0.9% (1/109), p = 0.063, respectively. Hospital costs (excluding the prosthesis) were $12,825 (IQR 11,733-15,334) for SU-AVR and $12,386 (IQR 11,217-14,230) in ST-AVR, p = 0.055. CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher operative risks in SU-AVR, hospital mortality, morbidity and resource consumption did not differ. Operative times were shorter with the sutureless device and this improve- ment, along with more frequent ministernotomy, may have improved many postoperative aims.

Trends in Drug Use-Associated Infective Endocarditis and Heart Valve Surgery, 2007 to 2017: A Study of Statewide Discharge Data.

Background: Drug use-associated infective endocarditis (DUA-IE) is increasing as a result of the opioid epidemic. Infective endocarditis may require valve surgery, but surgical treatment of DUA-IE has invoked controversy, and the extent of its use is unknown. Objective: To examine hospitalization trends for DUA-IE, the proportion of hospitalizations with surgery, patient characteristics, length of stay, and charges. Design: 10-year analysis of a statewide hospital discharge database. Setting: North Carolina hospitals, 2007 to 2017. Patients: All patients aged 18 years or older hospitalized for IE. Measurements: Annual trends in all IE admissions and in IE hospitalizations with valve surgery, stratified by patients' drug use status. Characteristics of DUA-IE surgical hospitalizations, including patient demographic characteristics, length of stay, disposition, and charges. Results: Of 22 825 IE hospitalizations, 2602 (11%) were for DUA-IE. Valve surgery was performed in 1655 IE hospitalizations (7%), including 285 (17%) for DUA-IE. Annual DUA-IE hospitalizations increased from 0.92 to 10.95 and DUA-IE hospitalizations with surgery from 0.10 to 1.38 per 100 000 persons. In the final year, 42% of IE valve surgeries were performed in patients with DUA-IE. Compared with other surgical patients with IE, those with DUA-IE were younger (median age, 33 vs. 56 years), were more commonly female (47% vs. 33%) and white (89% vs. 63%), and were primarily insured by Medicaid (38%) or uninsured (35%). Hospital stays for DUA-IE were longer (median, 27 vs. 17 days), with higher median charges ($250 994 vs. $198 764). Charges for 282 DUA-IE hospitalizations exceeded $78 million. Limitation: Reliance on administrative data and billing codes. Conclusion: DUA-IE hospitalizations and valve surgeries increased more than 12-fold, and nearly half of all IE valve surgeries were performed in patients with DUA-IE. The swell of patients with DUA-IE is reshaping the scope, type, and financing of health care resources needed to effectively treat IE. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health.