Analysis of treatment cost differences in patients undergoing femoral versus radial access in outpatient diagnostic cerebral arteriograms.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient diagnostic cerebral arteriograms are the most common procedure in neuroendovascular surgery, and the use of transradial access for these studies is growing. Although transradial access has been associated with lower hospital costs for elective diagnostic and interventional neuroendovascular procedures, no study has compared transfemoral access and transradial access costs for a homogenous population of patients undergoing outpatient diagnostic cerebral arteriogram. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective study, the Value Driven Outcomes database was used to evaluate treatment costs for patients who underwent outpatient diagnostic cerebral arteriogram from January 2019 to December 2022. Propensity-score matching was performed to reduce confounders. Costs from each encounter were subcategorized into imaging, supplies, pharmacy, procedures, labs, and facility costs. RESULTS: After matching, 337 patients each for transradial access and transfemoral access were available for analysis. A total of 118,992 cost data points were associated with all encounters. Overall, per-visit costs were 15.2% cheaper for patients who underwent transradial access versus transfemoral access (p < 0.001). Most of the cost difference was due to supplies (35.2% cost difference, p < 0.001) and procedure costs (9.3% cost difference, p < 0.001). No statistical differences were observed between the two approaches in imaging, pharmacy, labs, and facility costs (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Costs for outpatient diagnostic cerebral arteriogram were lower in patients who underwent transradial access versus transfemoral access because of supply and procedure costs. Understanding reasons for cost differences in common procedures is important for creating strategies to reduce overall healthcare costs. Additionally, addressing the cost differences of newer techniques may increase the likelihood that they are more readily implemented by hospitals and providers.

Factors Associated With Morbidity and Retreatment After Surgical Management of Nonacute Subdural Hematomas in Elderly Patients.

Background Preoperative identification of clinical, radiographic, and surgery-specific factors associated with nonacute subdural hematomas (SDHs) may enable clinicians to optimize the efficacy of the initial surgical intervention, improve outcomes, and decrease rates of surgical recurrence. Methods The authors identified patients aged ≥65 years who underwent surgical treatment of chronic, subacute, or mixed-density SDH at a level-1 trauma hospital over a ten-year period (2010-2019). Pre-and postoperative clinical, radiographic, and surgery-specific data were collected. Predictors of surgical recurrence as well as morbidity, mortality, and discharge disposition were analyzed. Results There were 268 nonacute SDHs treated surgically; 46 were chronic, 19 were subacute, and 203 were mixed density. Of these, 179 were treated with burr hole(s), 62 with miniature craniotomy, and 27 via a large craniotomy and removal of subdural membranes. Statin use was protective (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.08, 0.60) against recurrence requiring reoperation. Preoperative use of antithrombotic agents was not significantly associated with increased recurrence requiring reoperation. Smaller preoperative hematoma thickness was associated with significantly lower mortality risk, whereas mixed-density hematomas, patient age, change in thickness after surgery, density, and presence of cisternal effacement were significantly associated with discharge disposition. Hematoma type was also associated with hospital and intensive care length of stay. Conclusions Our experience suggests that, in elderly patients, premorbid statin usage is associated with lower recurrence rates and preoperative antithrombotic use does not affect recurrence when appropriately reversed before surgery. Patient age, preoperative thickness, and hematoma type contribute to postoperative outcomes such as discharge disposition and length of stay.

Investigating the "Weekend Effect" on Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Endovascular Mechanical Thrombectomy for Ischemic Stroke.

OBJECTIVES: With growing evidence of its efficacy for patients with large-vessel occlusion (LVO) ischemic stroke, the use of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has increased. The "weekend effect," whereby patients presenting during weekends/off hours have worse clinical outcomes than those presenting during normal working hours, is a critical area of study in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Our objective was to evaluate whether a "weekend effect" exists in patients undergoing EVT. METHODS: This retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of the 2016-2018 Nationwide Inpatient Sample data included patients ≥18 years with documented diagnosis of ischemic stroke (ICD-10 codes I63, I64, and H34.1), procedural code for EVT, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score; the exposure variable was weekend vs. weekday treatment. The primary outcome was in-hospital death; secondary outcomes were favorable discharge, extended hospital stay (LOS), and cost. Logistic regression models were constructed to determine predictors for outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 6052 AIS patients who received EVT (mean age 68.7±14.8 years; 50.8% female; 70.8% White; median (IQR) admission NIHSS 16 (10-21). The primary outcome of in-hospital death occurred in 560 (11.1%); the secondary outcome of favorable discharge occurred in 1039 (20.6%). The mean LOS was 7.8±8.6 days. There were no significant differences in the outcomes or cost based on admission timing. In the mixed-effects models, we found no effect of weekend vs. weekday admission on in-hospital death, favorable discharge, or extended LOS. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that the "weekend effect" does not impact outcomes or cost for patients who undergo EVT for LVO.

Influence of neurovascular embolic coil primary wind diameter on aneurysm packing density and case costs.

AIMS: Endovascular coiling is a common modality for treating intracranial aneurysms; however, recanalization occurs in approximately 1 in 5 cases, with downstream consequences of regrowth and rupture. Aneurysm packing density >24% reduces recanalization risk; packing density can be increased by inserting additional coils or by using coils with larger volumetric filling. Coil volume depends on length and primary wind diameter (PWD). This study evaluated the influence of PWD on packing density and total case costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hypothetical scenarios and one case study were analyzed. In scenario one, the number of coils required to achieve packing density >24% in a hypothetical aneurysm was determined for 0.012″ vs. 0.010″ PWD coils. In scenario two, the total length of 0.010″ vs. 0.012″ PWD coils required to achieve a packing density >24% was analyzed relative to aneurysm volume. In the case study, packing densities with one 0.012″ PWD coil (actual scenario) and one 0.010″ PWD coil (theoretical scenario) were compared. RESULTS: In scenario one, cost savings would be realized by using four 0.012″ PWD coils vs. seven 0.010″ PWD coils to achieve packing density >24%. In scenario two, greater volumetric filling of 0.012″ vs. 0.010″ PWD coils was correlated with lower total length of coil required. In the case study, a 0.012″ PWD coil achieved packing density >24%, whereas an equivalent length 0.010″ PWD coil would not. LIMITATIONS: Theoretical modeling was used to explore the impact of coil PWD on aneurysm packing density. In clinical practice, packing density depends not only on PWD but on its length, shape, distribution within an aneurysm, and other recanalization risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Coil PWD influences packing density, the number of coils required to achieve a specific packing density, and total case costs. Using 0.012″ PWD coils may provide cost and procedural efficiencies.

Reduced 2-year aneurysm retreatment and costs among patients treated with flow diversion versus non-flow diversion embolization: A Premier Healthcare Database retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of endovascular treatments, including Pipeline embolization devices (PEDs) and coiling approaches (non-PEDs), has played an increasingly important role in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Despite multiple studies evaluating PEDs, a real-world evaluation of follow-up outcomes and costs remains to be completed. METHODS: The Premier Healthcare Database (PHD), 2010-2017, was queried to identify patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms treated endovascularly. Rates of readmission, retreatment, and cost at the same hospital were compared between patients who underwent PED and non-PED endovascular treatments of their aneurysms. One-to-three (PED-to-non-PED) propensity score (PS) matching was performed to adjust for potential case selection bias into the PED cohort, with covariates including age group, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) group, payor, region, and randomized hospital identifier. RESULTS: A total of 679 patients underwent PED placement and 8432 had non-PED treatments. Prior to PS matching, there were significant but minor differences in age (56.7±12.8 vs. 58.2±12.6 years, p = 0.004) and sex (male 16.6% vs. 24.4%, p<0.0001) for PED and non-PED, respectively, but no differences in CCI (p = 0.08), length of stay (p = 0.88), or rate of routine discharge (p = 0.21). All-cause readmission/emergency department reevaluation rates in the two cohorts were similar at 30, 90, and 180 days and 1 and 2 years. Our results identified a significantly lower retreatment rate for PEDs at all follow-up time points over a 2-year period (range: 0.9-8.1%) compared with non-PED treatments (range: 1.7-11.6%). These findings remained consistent after PS matching: all-cause readmission/reevaluation rates were significantly lower in patients treated with PED at 90 days, 180 days, 1 year, and 2 years (p<0.001). Although the initial treatment costs were higher for PED at time of treatment (p<0.001), cumulative follow-up emergency department visit and readmission costs (inclusive of patients with no readmission and/or no retreatment) were significantly lower for patients with initial PED relative to non-PED treatment at 2 years (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that PEDs may potentially reduce downstream retreatment rates and costs. Further work is required to improve identification of patient subgroups that could benefit from PED over non-PED treatments both initially and during follow-up.

Evaluation of disease severity and treatment intensity as cost drivers for ruptured intracranial aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have not evaluated the impact of illness severity and postrupture procedures in the cost of care for intracranial aneurysms. We hypothesize that the severity of aneurysm rupture and the aggressiveness of postrupture interventions play a role in cost. METHODS: The Value Driven Outcomes database was used to assess direct patient cost during the treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysm with clipping, coiling, and Pipeline flow diverters. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-eight patients (mean age 52.8 ± 14.1 years; 40.0% male) underwent craniotomy (64.6%), coiling (26.7%), or flow diversion (8.6%). Coiling was 1.4× more expensive than clipping (p = .005) and flow diversion was 1.7× more expensive than clipping (p < .001). More severe illness as measured by American Society of Anesthesia, Hunt/Hess, and Fisher scales incurred higher costs than less severe illness (p < .05). Use of a lumbar drain protocol to reduce subarachnoid hemorrhage and use of an external ventricular drain to manage intracranial pressure were associated with reduced (p = .05) and increased (p < .001) total costs, respectively. Patients with severe vasospasm (p < .005), those that received shunts (p < .001), and those who had complications (p < .001) had higher costs. Multivariate analysis showed that procedure type, length of stay, number of angiograms, vasospasm severity, disposition, and year of treatment were independent predictors of cost. CONCLUSIONS: These results show for the first time that disease and vasospasm severity and intensity of treatment directly impact the cost of care for patients with aneurysms in the USA. Strategies to alter these variables may prove important for cost reduction.

Initial Treatment for Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm and Its Follow-up: A Cost Analysis of Pipeline Flow Diverters versus Coiling.

Purpose Intracranial aneurysms are relatively common epidemiological problems for which the surveillance, treatment, and follow-up are costly. Although multiple studies have evaluated the treatment cost of aneurysms, the follow-up costs are often not examined. In our study, we analyzed how follow-up costs after treatment affected the overall cost of different endovascular techniques for treating aneurysms. Materials and methods An institutional database was used to evaluate the upfront and follow-up costs incurred by patients who underwent elective coiling or placement of a pipeline embolization device (PED) for the treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms from July 2011 to December 2017. Results A total of 114 patients (coiling, n = 37; PED, n = 77 ) were included in the study. There was no significant difference among patients in mean age [61.3 (±12.8 years) vs. 57.0 (±14.5 years); probability value (p) = 0.2], sex (male: 32.4% vs. 22.1%; p = 0.2), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade (p = 0.5), discharge disposition (p = 0.1), mean length of stay [3.1 days (±5.5) vs. 2.4 days (±2.6); p = 0.2) or follow-up period [22.7 months (±18.5) vs. 18.6 months (±14.9); p = 0.2). There were no differences in costs during admission (p = 0.5) or in follow-up (p = 0.3) between coiling and PED treatments. Initial costs were predominantly related to supplies/implants (56.1% vs. 63.7%) for both treatments. Follow-up costs mostly comprised facility costs (68.2% vs. 67.5%), and there were no differences in costs of subgroups such as supplies/implants (10.5% vs. 9.4%), imaging (17.0% vs. 17.8%), or facilties between coiling and PED. Conclusion These results suggest that the upfront and follow-up costs are mostly similar for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms irrespective of whether the providers used coiling or PED endovascular techniques. Hence, we conclude that follow-up costs should not be a deciding factor when considering these treatments.