The Effect of Patient and Hospital Characteristics on Total Costs of Peripheral Bypass in New York State.

INTRODUCTION: With the aging U.S. population, peripheral vascular procedures will become increasingly common. The objective of this study is to characterize the factors associated with increased total costs after peripheral bypass surgery. METHODS: Data for 34,819 patients undergoing peripheral bypass surgery in NY State were extracted using the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database for years 2009-2017. Patient demographics, All Patient Refined Diagnostic Related Groups (APR) severity score, mortality risk, hospital volume, and length of stay data were collected. Primary outcomes were total costs and length of stay. Data were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: 28.1% of peripheral bypass surgeries were performed in New York City. 7.9% of patients had extreme APR severity of illness whereas 32.0% had major APR severity of illness. 6.3% of patients had extreme risk of mortality and 1 in every 5 patients (20%) had major risk of mortality. 24.9% of patients were discharged to a facility. The mean length of stay (LOS) was 9.9 days. Patient LOS of 6-11 days was associated with +$2,791.76 total costs. Mean LOS of ≥ 12 days was associated with + $27,194.88 total costs. Multivariate analysis revealed risk factors associated with an admission listed in the fourth quartile of total costs (≥$36,694.44) for peripheral bypass surgery included NYC location (2.82, CI 2.62-3.04), emergency surgery (1.12, CI 1.03-1.22), extreme APR 2.08, 1.78-2.43, extreme risk of mortality (2.73, 2.34-3.19), emergency room visit (1.68, 1.57-1.81), discharge to a facility (1.27, CI 1.15-1.41), and LOS in the third or fourth quartile (11.09, 9.87-12.46). CONCLUSION: The cost of peripheral bypass surgery in New York State is influenced by a variety of factors including LOS, patient comorbidity and disease severity, an ER admission, and discharge to a facility.

Managing central venous access during a health care crisis.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, central venous access line teams were implemented at many hospitals throughout the world to provide access for critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to describe the structure, practice patterns, and outcomes of these vascular access teams during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, self-reported study of central venous access line teams in hospitals afflicted with the COVID-19 pandemic. To participate in the study, hospitals were required to meet one of the following criteria: development of a formal plan for a central venous access line team during the pandemic; implementation of a central venous access line team during the pandemic; placement of central venous access by a designated practice group during the pandemic as part of routine clinical practice; or management of an iatrogenic complication related to central venous access in a patient with COVID-19. RESULTS: Participants from 60 hospitals in 13 countries contributed data to the study. Central venous line teams were most commonly composed of vascular surgery and general surgery attending physicians and trainees. Twenty sites had 2657 lines placed by their central venous access line team or designated practice group. During that time, there were 11 (0.4%) iatrogenic complications associated with central venous access procedures performed by the line team or group at those 20 sites. Triple lumen catheters, Cordis (Santa Clara, Calif) catheters, and nontunneled hemodialysis catheters were the most common types of central venous lines placed by the teams. Eight (14%) sites reported experience in placing central venous lines in prone, ventilated patients with COVID-19. A dedicated line cart was used by 35 (59%) of the hospitals. Less than 50% (24 [41%]) of the participating sites reported managing thrombosed central lines in COVID-19 patients. Twenty-three of the sites managed 48 iatrogenic complications in patients with COVID-19 (including complications caused by providers outside of the line team or designated practice group). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a dedicated central venous access line team during a pandemic or other health care crisis is a way by which physicians trained in central venous access can contribute their expertise to a stressed health care system. A line team composed of physicians with vascular skill sets provides relief to resource-constrained intensive care unit, ward, and emergency medicine teams with a low rate of iatrogenic complications relative to historical reports. We recommend that a plan for central venous access line team implementation be in place for future health care crises.

A Review of the Evolution of Abdominal Aortic Endografts and Future Directions.

INTRODUCTION: Over the years, endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the gold-standard of therapy for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repairs. This study aims to analyze the evolution of stent graft devices and discuss the future direction of technological development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this paper, we will review prior eras of graft development (1992 to 2019) that included physician-made devices (era one), industry-made devices (era two), branch devices (era three), and fenestrated devices (era four). Additionally, future advancements that aim to overcome issues with short aneurysm necks, involvement of proximal visceral branches, and formation of endoleaks will be discussed. RESULTS: Future devices of note include a more conformable version of the EXCLUDER® device (W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Newark, Delaware) to better steer the top of the graft and modify for angulated necks, a version of the Endurant® device to include EndoAnchors (Medtronic plc, Minneapolis, Minnesota) to prevent formation of endoleaks, a novel Nellix® EVAS II device (Endologix Inc., Irvine, California) with aneurysm sac filling to prevent endoleaks and exclude the aneurysm sac, and an expanded Zenith® fenestrated device (Cook Medical Inc., Bloomington, Indiana) to include more visceral branches. This is in the setting of more recent advancements like pivoting fenestrated branch devices for "off-shelf" use and aneurysm repair that now extends to the thoracic aorta. CONCLUSION: With each iteration of devices, EVAR has evolved to overcome technical challenges and offer expanded applicability to different types of AAAs.

Hemodialysis Vascular Access: Rising Costs as a Surrogate Marker for Patency and Function of Arteriovenous Fistulas.

BACKGROUND: Establishment and maintenance of vascular access for hemodialysis is life-sustaining for patients needing renal-replacement therapy. Arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are the preferred type of access, but the costs associated with creation and maintenance are poorly characterized, especially with respect to patient characteristics. METHODS: A prospectively maintained registry has been established at The Mount Sinai Hospital for patients undergoing access procedures since 2007. We studied 163 patients undergoing successfully placed and cannulated AVFs as their first permanent ipsilateral access and for whom 3-year follow-up was available, including 18 patients with failed contralateral AVFs. Records were analyzed for institutional inpatient and outpatient procedures related to access maturation, imaging, catheter-related procedures, and revisions. We determined hospital costs for 3 AVF locations, assessing the contribution of various factors to variation in costs and patency. RESULTS: The median first-year cost of patent AVFs was $8,662, with $4,754 attributable to initial creation. For fistulas remaining patent for at least 3 years, median cumulative 36-month costs were $11,639, with $1,343 attributable to imaging and $10,478 to creation and interventions. Fistulas with patent lifetimes of 19-30 months (3.7%) had median cumulative costs of $26,035. Those with patent lifetimes of 6 months or shorter (6.7%) had median cumulative costs of $17,526. Right-sided fistulas were associated with 41% higher 1-year costs and 38% higher 3-year costs when compared with left-sided fistulas. Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) status and prior history of complex contralateral access were also associated with higher 1-year and 3-year costs. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodialysis access maintenance contributes significantly to the healthcare burden of renal disease. Our data suggest that particular patient characteristics factor into patency and costs. Short-term mounting costs associated with AVF maintenance may portend poor long-term patency. Rising healthcare costs cannot be easily controlled without understanding the clinical factors driving them.

Vascular surgeon-hospitalist comanagement improves in-hospital mortality at the expense of increased in-hospital cost.

OBJECTIVE: We have shown that vascular surgeon- hospitalist co management resulted in improved in-hospital mortality rates. We now aim to assess the impact of the hospitalist co management service (HCS) on healthcare cost. METHODS: A total of 1558 patients were divided into three cohorts and compared: 516 in 2012, 525 in 2013, and 517 in 2014. The HCS began in January 2013. Data were standardized for six vascular surgeons that were present 2012-2014. New attendings were excluded. Ten hospitalists participated. Case mix index (CMI), contribution margin, total hospital charges (THCs), length of stay (LOS), actual direct costs (ADCs), and actual variable indirect costs (AVICs) were compared. Analysis of variance with post-hoc tests, t-tests, and linear regressions were performed. RESULTS: THC rose by a mean difference of $14,578.31 between 2012 and 2014 (P < .001) with a significant difference found between all groups during the study period (P = .0004). ADC increased more than AVIC; however, both significantly increased over time (P = .0002 and P = .014, respectively). A mean $3326.63 increase in ADC was observed from 2012 to 2014 (P < .0001). AVIC only increased by an average $392.86 during the study period (P = .01). This increased cost was observed in the context of a higher CMI and longer LOS. CMI increased from 2.25 in 2012 to 2.53 in 2014 (P = .006). LOS increased by a mean 1.02 days between 2012 and 2014 (P = .016), and significantly during the study period overall (P = .018). After adjusting for CMI, LOS increases by only 0.61 days between 2012 and 2014 (P = .07). In a final regression model, THC is independently predicted by comanagement, CMI, and LOS. After adjusting for CMI and LOS, the increase in THC because of comanagement (2012 vs 2014) accounts for only $4073.08 of the total increase (P < .001). During this time, 30-day readmission rates decreased by ∼7% (P = .005), while related 30-day readmission rates decreased by ∼2% (P = .32). Physician contribution margin remained unchanged over the 3-year period (P = .76). The most prevalent diagnosis-related group was consistent across all years. Variation in the principal diagnosis code was observed with the prevalence of circulatory disorders because of type II diabetes replacing atherosclerosis with gangrene as the most prevalent diagnosis in 2013 and 2014 compared with 2012. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital cost is significantly higher since the start of the HCS. This surge may relate to increased CMI, LOS, and improved coding. This increase in cost may be justified as we have observed sustained reduction in in-hospital mortality and slightly improved readmission rates.

A survey of 0 + 5 vascular surgery residency candidates: Perceptions of an applicant pool.

BACKGROUND: Applications to integrated (0 + 5) vascular surgery residencies have increased, while total applications have stayed relatively constant. This survey sought to document the perceptions of 0 + 5 vascular surgery applicants. METHODS: Academic faculty conducted interviews for 0 + 5 residency match at an academic medical center in preparation for the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Main Residency Match. Applicant pool (n = 20) perceptions were determined with surveys. Participation was anonymous and voluntary. RESULTS: Nineteen interviewees (26.3% female: 73.7% male), age (26.8 ± 2.6 years) responded (95% response rate). Of 19 respondents, 68% became interested in vascular surgery in their third year with 53% becoming aware of 0 + 5 programs in their third year. All respondents identified a vascular surgery attending at their institution as significant mentors. Forty-seven percent identified their mentor during their third year of medical school. All respondents felt that 0 + 5 training would prepare them adequately for the workforce and board certification exams. Almost all (89%) had plans to seek jobs immediately upon completion of residency. CONCLUSION: Applicants remained positive about their planned training and career paths. Attending vascular surgeons were identified as the strongest mentors, yet most students decided only in their third and fourth years to pursue 0 + 5 residencies. Educational debt remains a concern, and there may be consideration for a concerted effort to recruit potential candidates sooner.

Supply and demand: Will we have enough vascular surgeons by 2030?

The increase in prevalence of certain cardiovascular risk factors increases susceptibility to vascular disease, which may create demand for surgical intervention. In our study, data collected by the American Association of Medical Colleges Physician Specialty Databook of 2012, the United States Census Bureau, and other nationwide organizations were referenced to calculate future changes in vascular surgeon supply and prevalence of people at risk for vascular disease. In 2010, there were 2853 active vascular surgeons. By 2040, the workforce is expected to linearly rise to 3573. There will be an exponential rise in people with cardiovascular risk factors. Adding to concern, in 2030, an estimated 3333 vascular surgeons will be available for 180,000,000 people with at least one risk factor for peripheral arterial disease. The paucity of properly trained surgeons entering the workforce needs to be addressed before this shortage becomes a larger burden on healthcare providers and governmental spending.

Evolution of gender-related differences in outcomes from two decades of endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Women have been under-represented in trials that set guidelines for the management of aortic aneurysms. Several studies reported inferior outcomes in women compared with men after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). We investigated the relationship between gender and outcomes after EVAR. METHODS: A total of 1380 consecutive patients underwent elective EVAR from 1992 to 2012. Baseline, intraoperative, and postoperative variables by gender were analyzed from a prospective database. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 214 women (15.5%) and 1166 men (84.5%). Women were older than men at repair (77.8 vs 74.5 years, P < .001) and had less cardiac disease (P = .005). They had shorter (19.8 ± 12.9 vs 26.3 ± 14.7 mm; P < .001) more angulated aortic necks (38.8° ± 16.1° vs 31.2° ± 14.7°; P < .001) and fewer iliac aneurysms (P = .002). Women had more arterial reconstructions (iliac conduits, P = .006; thrombolysis and thrombectomy, P = .013; patch angioplasty, P < .001; endarterectomy, P < .001), more perioperative complications (16.9% vs 9.1%; P = .001), and more in-hospital days (4.1 vs 3.4 days; P = .029). Perioperative mortality was equivalent (women: 2% vs men: 2.3%; P = .73). Mean follow-up was 30.9 months. Women and men experienced equivalent aneurysm-related deaths and overall survival. Survival curve analysis showed endoleaks were more likely to develop in women than men (P = .005); however, there was no difference in rates of arterial reinterventions required for each gender during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Female gender is associated with more periprocedural complications, adjunctive arterial procedures, and increased endoleaks but does not affect long-term reinterventions or survival. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the effect of gender on outcomes. These data should be considered when selecting EVAR for men and women.

Analysis of Florida and New York state hospital discharges suggests that carotid stenting in symptomatic women is associated with significant increase in mortality and perioperative morbidity compared with carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Although large randomized studies have established the efficacy and safety of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and, recently, carotid artery stenting (CAS), the under-representation of women in these trials leaves the comparison of risks to benefits of performing these procedures on women an open question. To address this issue, we reviewed the hospital outcomes and delineated patient characteristics predicting outcome in women undergoing carotid interventions using New York and Florida statewide hospital discharge databases. METHODS: We analyzed in-hospital mortality, postoperative stroke, cardiac postoperative complications, and combined postoperative stoke and mortality in 20,613 CEA or CAS hospitalizations for the years 2007 to 2009. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses of variables were performed. RESULTS: CEA was performed in 16,576 asymptomatic and 1744 symptomatic women and CAS in 1943 asymptomatic and 350 symptomatic women. Compared with CAS, CEA rates, in asymptomatic vs symptomatic, were significantly lower for in-hospital mortality (0.3% vs 0.8% and 0.4% vs 3.4%), stroke (1.5% vs 2.6% and 3.5% vs 9.4%), and combined stroke/mortality (1.7% vs 3.1% and 3.8% vs 10.9%). In cohorts matched by propensity scores, the same trend favoring CEA remained significant in symptomatic women. There was no difference in cardiac complication rates among asymptomatic women, but among symptomatic woman cardiac complications were more frequent after CAS (10.6% vs 6.5%; P = .0077). Among symptomatic women, the presence of renal disease, coronary artery disease, or age ≥80 years increased the risk of CAS over CEA threefold for the composite end point of stroke or death. For asymptomatic women only in those with coronary artery disease or diabetes, there was a statistical difference in the composite mortality/stroke rates favoring CEA (1.9% vs 3.3% and 1.7% vs 3.4%, respectively). After adjusting for relevant clinical and demographic risk factors and hospital annual volume, for CAS vs CEA, the risk of the composite end point of stroke or mortality was 1.7-fold higher in symptomatic and 3.4-fold higher in asymptomatic patients. Medicaid insurance, symptomatic patient, history of cancer, and presence of heart failure on admission were among other strong predictors of composite stroke/mortality outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Databases reflecting real-world practice performance and management of carotid disease in women suggest that CEA compared with CAS has overall better perioperative outcomes in women. Importantly, CAS is associated with significantly higher morbidity in certain clinical settings and this should be taken into account when choosing a revascularization procedure.

Effect of gender on long-term survival after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair based on results from the Medicare national database.

OBJECTIVES: Historically, women have higher procedurally related mortality rates than men for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Although endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has improved these rates for men and women, effects of gender on long-term survival with different types of AAA repair, such as EVAR vs open aneurysm repair (OAR), need further investigation. To address this issue, we analyzed survival in matched cohorts who received EVAR or OAR for both elective (eAAA) and ruptured AAA (rAAA). METHODS: Using the Medicare Beneficiary Database (1995-2006), we compiled a cohort of patients who underwent OAR or EVAR for eAAA (n = 322,892) or rAAA (n = 48,865). Men and women were matched by propensity scores, accounting for baseline demographics, comorbid conditions, treating institution, and surgeon experience. Frailty models were used to compare long-term survival of the matched groups. RESULTS: Perioperative mortality for eAAAs was significantly lower among EVAR vs OAR recipients for both men (1.84% vs 4.80%) and women (3.19% vs 6.37%, P < .0001). One difference, however, was that the survival benefit of EVAR was sustained for the 6 years of follow-up in women but disappeared in 2 years in men. Similarly, the survival benefit of men vs women after elective EVAR disappeared after 1.5 to 2 years. For rAAAs, 30-day mortality was significantly lower for EVAR recipients compared with OAR recipients, for both men (33.43% vs 43.70% P < .0001) and women (41.01% vs 48.28%, P = .0201). Six-year survival was significantly higher for men who received EVAR vs those who received OAR (P = .001). However, the survival benefit for women who received EVAR compared with OAR disappeared in 6 months. Survival was also substantially higher for men than women after emergent EVAR (P = .0007). CONCLUSIONS: Gender disparity is evident from long-term outcomes after AAA repair. In the case for rAAA, where the long-term outcome for women was significantly worse than for men, the less invasive EVAR treatment did not appear to benefit women to the same extent that it did for men. Although the long-term outcome after open repair for elective AAA was also worse for women, EVAR benefit for women was sustained longer than for men. These associations require further study to isolate specific risk factors that would be potential targets for improving AAA management.

Lessons learned from the analysis of gender effect on risk factors and procedural outcomes of lower extremity arterial disease.

INTRODUCTION: Despite overall improvement, there is still a gender-related disparity in the outcomes of lower extremities peripheral arterial disease (PAD). We analyzed sex-related variability among factors that are known to influence outcomes. METHODS: Data on PAD inpatient hospitalizations from New York, New Jersey, and Florida state hospital discharge databases (1998-2007) were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of the 372,692 surgical hospitalizations identified, 162,730 (43.66%) involved women. Men and women undergoing vascular procedures differed in that more men smoked (18% vs 14%; P<.0001), and more men had coronary artery disease (40% vs 33%; P<.0001). Women were more likely to be obese (11.86% vs 4.89%; P<.0001), black (18.81% vs 12.66%; P<.0001), older, and have critical limb ischemia (CLI) (39.41% vs 37.67%; P<.0001). They had higher mortality (5.26% vs 4.21%; P<.0001) and complication rates, especially bleeding (10.62 % vs 8.19%; P<.0001) and infection (3.23% vs 2.88%; P<.0001). Mortality rates after endovascular procedures were lower and showed marginal difference between genders (2.87% vs 2.11%; P<.0001). The difference was more pronounced after open revascularizations (5.05% for women vs 4.00% for men; P<.0001) and amputations (9.82% for women vs 8.82% for men; P<.0001). Bleeding differences between men and women were greatest when both open and endovascular procedures were done during the same hospitalizations and lowest after major amputations. Similar to bleeding, transgender differences in postoperative infections were more pronounced after combination of open and endovascular procedures. Using a multivariable model, female gender remained a predictor of perioperative mortality, infection, and bleeding after vascular intervention (odds ratios 1.15, 1.21, and 1.32, respectively). Female gender negatively influenced the mortality of patients with cerebrovascular and coronary disease and those of black race even after adjusting for relevant clinical and demographic risk factors. Gender effect on mortality dissipated in octogenarians and patients with claudication. CONCLUSION: Female gender continues to be an important risk factor that negatively influences the outcomes of vascular interventions; however, these effects vary between different high-risk groups and procedures. Gender effect on mortality dissipates in elderly patients. Prompt recognition of the associations between gender and various risk factors of cardiovascular disease and aggressive modification of these risk factors in female patients may improve gender-related disparity in the outcomes of vascular disease.

Endovascular treatment of iliac occlusive disease: review and update.

Use of endovascular interventions for arterial occlusive lesions continues to increase. With the evolution of the technology supporting these therapeutic measures, the results of these interventions continue to improve. In general, a comparison of techniques for revascularization of iliac occlusive diseases shows similar initial technical success rates for open versus percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Angioplasty is often associated with lower periprocedural morbidity and mortality rates. Conversely, surgery frequently provides greater long-term patency, although late failure of percutaneous therapies may occur but still can be treated successfully with reintervention. The perpetual buildup of experience with angioplasty and stenting will eventually characterize its role in the management of occlusive disease. This review outlines the current consensus and applicability of endovascular management of iliac occlusive diseases.