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.

Recent Trends in Endovascular and Surgical Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Disease in the Medicare Population.

OBJECTIVE. Although radiologists developed endovascular treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in the 1960s, vascular surgeons and cardiologists have become increasingly involved in its application. The purpose of this study was to examine utilization trends in endovascular and surgical treatment of PAD in recent years in the Medicare population. CONCLUSION. Surgical treatment of PAD has decreased each year from 2011 to 2016, whereas endovascular treatment has increased each year. By 2016, Medicare patients who needed revascularization for PAD were more than four times as likely to undergo endovascular as they were to undergo surgical treatment. Between 2011 and 2016, radiologists, vascular surgeons, and cardiologists all increased their endovascular volume, but by 2016, vascular surgeons and cardiologists performed three of every four endovascular procedures for the Medicare population. While only 12% of the total endovascular procedures for PAD were performed in 2016, radiology has grown its procedural volume each year from 2011 through 2016.

An Outcome Assessment of a Single Institution's Longitudinal Experience with Uveal Melanoma Patients with Liver Metastasis.

There is no FDA-approved treatment for metastatic uveal melanoma (UM) and overall outcomes are generally poor for those who develop liver metastasis. We performed a retrospective single-institution chart review on consecutive series of UM patients with liver metastasis who were treated at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital between 1971-1993 (Cohort 1, n = 80), 1998-2007 (Cohort 2, n = 198), and 2008-2017 (Cohort 3, n = 452). In total, 70% of patients in Cohort 1 received only systemic therapies as their treatment modality for liver metastasis, while 98% of patients in Cohort 2 and Cohort 3 received liver-directed treatment either alone or with systemic therapy. Median Mets-to-Death OS was shortest in Cohort 1 (5.3 months, 95% CI: 4.2-7.0), longer in Cohort 2 (13.6 months, 95% CI: 12.2-16.6) and longest in Cohort 3 (17.8 months, 95% CI: 16.6-19.4). Median Eye Tx-to-Death OS was shortest in Cohort 1 (40.8 months, 95% CI: 37.1-56.9), and similar in Cohort 2 (62.6 months, 95% CI: 54.6-71.5) and Cohort 3 (59.4 months, 95% CI: 56.2-64.7). It is speculated that this could be due to the shift of treatment modalities from DTIC-based chemotherapy to liver-directed therapies. Combination of liver-directed and newly developed systemic treatments may further improve the survival of these patients.

Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval Rates among Radiologists and Nonradiologists.

PURPOSE: To evaluate inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement and retrieval rates among radiologists, vascular surgeons, cardiologists, other surgeons, and all other health care providers for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in the years 2012-2015. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files were used to determine the volume and utilization rate of IVC filter placement, IVC filter repositioning, and IVC filter retrieval, which correspond to procedure codes 37191, 37192, and 37193, respectively. Procedural code 37193 was not available before 2012, so data were reviewed for the years 2012-2015. RESULTS: The total volume of Medicare IVC filter placement decreased from 57,785 in 2012 to 44,378 in 2015, with radiologists responsible for 60% of all filter placements. Volume of IVC filter placement declined across all specialties, including radiologists, who placed 33,744 in 2012 and 27,957 in 2015. In contrast, total retrieval of IVC filters increased from 4,060 removals in 2012 to 6,166 in 2015. Retrieval rate per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries increased from 11 in 2012 to 16 in 2015. Radiologists removed the bulk of the filters: 64% in both 2012 and 2015. Vascular surgeons, cardiologists, and other surgeons retrieved, respectively, 20%, 10%, and 5% of all IVC filters in 2012 and 22%, 9%, and 5% in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: From 2012 to 2015, IVC filter placement steadily decreased across all specialties. Retrieval rate of IVC filters continued to rise over the same period. Radiologists were responsible for the majority of IVC filter placements and retrievals.