Dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane to treat venous leg ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (DHACM) in Medicare enrolees who developed a venous leg ulcer (VLU). METHOD: This economic evaluation used a four-state Markov model to simulate the disease progression of VLUs for patients receiving advanced treatment (AT) with DHACM or no advanced treatment (NAT) over a three-year time horizon from a US Medicare perspective. DHACM treatments were assessed when following parameters for use (FPFU), whereby applications were initiated 30-45 days after the initial VLU diagnosis claim, and reapplications occurred on a weekly to biweekly basis until completion of the treatment episode. The cohort was modelled on the claims of 530,220 Medicare enrolees who developed a VLU between 2015-2019. Direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the net monetary benefit (NMB) at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY were applied. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to test the uncertainty of model results. RESULTS: DHACM applied FPFU dominated NAT, yielding a lower per-patient cost of $170 and an increase of 0.010 QALYs over three years. The resulting NMB was $1178 per patient in favour of DHACM FPFU over the same time horizon. The rate of VLU recurrence had a notable impact on model uncertainty. In the PSA, DHACM FPFU was cost-effective in 63.01% of simulations at the $100,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: In this analysis, DHACM FPFU was the dominant strategy compared to NAT, as it was cost-saving and generated a greater number of QALYs over three years from the US Medicare perspective. A companion VLU Medicare outcomes analysis revealed that patients who received AT with a cellular, acellular and matrix-like product (CAMP) compared to patients who received NAT had the best outcomes. Given the added clinical benefits to patients at lower cost, providers should recommend DHACM FPFU to patients with VLU who qualify. Decision-makers for public insurers (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid) and commercial payers should establish preferential formulary placement for reimbursement of DHACM to reduce budget impact and improve the long-term health of their patient populations dealing with these chronic wounds. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: Support for this analysis was provided by MiMedx Group, Inc., US. JLD, and RAF are employees of MiMedx Group, Inc. WHT, BH, PS, BGC and WVP were consultants to MiMedx Group, Inc. VD, AO, MRK, JAN, NW and GAM served on the MiMedx Group, Inc. Advisory Board. MRK and JAN served on a speaker's bureau. WVP declares personal fees and equity holdings from Stage Analytics, US.

Prospective assessment of dynamic changes in frailty and its impact on early clinical outcomes following physician-modified fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty, a predictor of poor outcomes, has been widely studied as a screening tool in surgical decision-making. However, the impact of frailty on the outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repairs (FBEVARs) is less well established. In addition, the changes in frailty during recovery after FBEVAR are unknown. We aim to assess the impact of frailty on outcomes of high-risk patients undergoing physician-modified FBEVARs for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, as well as the changes in frailty during follow-up. METHODS: Consecutive patients enrolled in a single-center prospective Physician-Sponsored Investigational Device Exemption protocol (FDA# G200159) were evaluated. In addition to the baseline characteristics, frailty was assessed using the Hopkins Frailty Score (HFS) and frailty index (FI) measured by the Frailty Meter. Sarcopenia was measured by L3 total psoas muscle area (PMA). These measurements were repeated during follow-up. The follow-up HFS and FI were compared with baseline scores using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, whereas follow-up PMA measurements were compared with the baseline using the paired t test. The association between baseline frailty and morbidity was evaluated by the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Seventy patients were analyzed in a prospective Physician-Sponsored Investigational Device Exemption study from February 9, 2021, to June 2, 2023. At baseline, HFS identified 54% of patients as not frail, 43% as intermediately frail, and 3% as frail. Technical success of FBEVAR was 94% with one in-hospital mortality. Early major adverse events were seen in 10 (14.3%) patients. No difference in baseline FI was seen between patients with early morbidity and those without. Patients who were not frail per HFS were less likely to experience early morbidity (P = .033), and there was a significantly lower baseline PMA in patients who experienced early morbidity (P = .016). At 1 month, patients experienced a significant increase in HFS and HFS category (P = .001 and P = .01) and a significant decrease in sarcopenia (mean PMA: -96 mm2, P = .005). At 6 months, HFS and HFS category as well as PMA returned toward baseline (P = .42, P = .38, and mean PMA: +4 mm2, P = .6). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative frailty and sarcopenia were associated with early morbidity after physician-modified FBEVAR. During follow-up, patients became more frail and sarcopenic by 1 month. Recovery from this initial decline was seen by 6 months, suggesting that frailty and sarcopenia are reversible processes rather than a unidirectional phenomenon of continued decline.

Treatment patterns and outcomes of Medicare enrolees who developed venous leg ulcers.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate the comorbidities, treatment patterns and outcomes of Medicare enrolees who developed venous leg ulcers (VLUs). METHOD: Medicare Limited Data Standard Analytic Hospital Inpatient and Outpatient Department Files were used to follow patients who received medical care for a VLU between 1 October 2015 and 2 October 2019. Patients diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) and a VLU were propensity matched into four groups based on their treatment regimen. Episode claims were used to document demographics, comorbidities and treatments of Medicare enrolees who developed VLUs, as well as important outcomes, such as time to ulcer closure, rates of complications and hospital utilisation rates. Outcomes were compared across key propensity-matched groups. RESULTS: In total, 42% of Medicare enrolees with CVI (n=1,225,278), developed at least one VLU during the study, and 79% had their episode claim completed within one year. However, 59% of patients developed another VLU during the study period. This analysis shows that only 38.4% of VLU episodes received documented VLU conservative care treatment. Propensity-matched episodes that received an advanced treatment or high-cost skin substitutes for a wound which had not progressed by 30 days demonstrated the best outcomes when their cellular, acellular, matrix-like product (CAMP) treatment was applied weekly or biweekly (following parameters for use). Complications such as rates of infection (33%) and emergency department visits (>50%) decreased among patients who received an advanced treatment (following parameters for use). CONCLUSION: Medicare enrolees with CVI have diverse comorbidities and many do not receive sufficient management, which contributes to high rates of VLUs and subsequent complications. Medicare patients at risk of a VLU who receive early identification and advanced CAMP treatment demonstrated improved quality of life and significantly reduced healthcare resource utilisation.

Cost-effectiveness of Compression Therapy With Early Endovenous Ablation in Venous Ulceration for a Medicare Population.

Importance: Venous leg ulcers (VLU) are the most common cause of lower extremity ulceration that commonly occur among older individuals and are characterized by a slow healing trajectory and frequent recurrence; in the United States, VLUs affect more than 600 000 people per year with an estimated cost of $3.5 billion. Clinical trial data show that early intervention with endovenous ablation substantially improves the healing rate and reduces recurrence among patients with VLUs, but there is a need to assess the cost-effectiveness of early endovenous ablation in the US context. Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of early endovenous ablation of superficial venous reflux in patients with VLU from the US Medicare perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used a Markov model to simulate the disease progression of VLU for patients receiving compression therapy with early vs deferred ablation over 3 years. The simulated cohort included patients with VLU aged 65 years and older who had clinical characteristics similar to those in the randomized Early Venous Reflux Ablation trial in the United Kingdom. Data were analyzed from September 2021 to June 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental monetary benefits at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test uncertainty of model results. Results: This model used a simulated cohort of patients with VLU aged 65 years and older enrolled in Medicare. Early ablation dominated, with a lower per-patient cost of $12 527 and an increase of 2.011 QALYs, whereas compression therapy with deferred ablation yielded a per-patient cost of $15 208 and 1.985 QALYs gained. At a $100 000/QALY cost-effectiveness threshold, the incremental net monetary benefit was $5226 per patient in favor of early ablation. Probability of healing, followed by the probability of recurrence, was the parameter with greatest impact on model uncertainty. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that early ablation was cost-effective in 59.2% of simulations at the $100 000/QALY threshold. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of compression therapy with early endovenous ablation, early intervention was dominant, as it was cost saving and generated greater QALYs over 3 years from the US Medicare perspective. Payers should prioritize coverage for early ablation to prevent VLU complications rather than treat a costly outcome that also reduces patient well-being.

Contemporary outcomes of traumatic popliteal artery injury repair from the popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injury in trauma study.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic popliteal artery injuries are associated with the greatest risk of limb loss of all peripheral vascular injuries, with amputation rates of 10% to 15%. The purpose of the present study was to examine the outcomes of patients who had undergone operative repair for traumatic popliteal arterial injuries and identify the factors independently associated with limb loss. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective review of all patients with traumatic popliteal artery injuries from 2007 to 2018 was performed. All the patients who had undergone operative repair of popliteal arterial injuries were included in the present analysis. The patients who had required a major lower extremity amputation (transtibial or transfemoral) were compared with those with successful limb salvage at the last follow-up. The significant predictors (P < .05) for amputation on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients from 11 institutions were included in the present analysis. The median age was 32 years (interquartile range, 21-40 years), and 79% were men. The median follow-up was 72 days (interquartile range, 20-366 days). The overall major amputation rate was 13%. Primary repair had been performed in 17% of patients, patch repair in 2%, and interposition or bypass in 81%. One patient had undergone endovascular repair with stenting. The overall 1-year primary patency was 89%. Of the patients who had lost primary patency, 46% ultimately required major amputation. Early loss (within 30 days postoperatively) of primary patency was five times more frequent for the patients who had subsequently required amputation. On multivariate regression, the significant perioperative factors independently associated with major amputation included the initial POPSAVEIT (popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injury in trauma) score, loss of primary patency, absence of detectable immediate postoperative pedal Doppler signals, and lack of postoperative antiplatelet therapy. Concomitant popliteal vein injury, popliteal injury location (P1, P2, P3), injury severity score, and tibial vs popliteal distal bypass target were not independently associated with amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Traumatic popliteal artery injuries are associated with a significant rate of major amputation. The preoperative POPSAVEIT score remained independently associated with amputation after including the perioperative factors. The lack of postoperative pedal Doppler signals and loss of primary patency were highly associated with major amputation. The use of postoperative antiplatelet therapy was inversely associated with amputation, perhaps indicating a protective effect.

Hospitalization Cost and In-hospital Outcomes Following Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection Repair.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported lower mortality and morbidity after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) when compared to open surgical repair (OSR) in the treatment of type B aortic dissection (TbAD). However, there are few studies in the literature on the cost of both treatment options. Thus, the aim of this study is to focus on in-hospital outcomes and cost associated with TbAD repair procedures in a national database in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Premier Healthcare Database (PHD) between June 2009 and March 2015 was performed. ICD-9-CM codes were used to identify patients who underwent OSR or TEVAR for TbAD. Endpoints included in-hospital adverse events, in-hospital mortality and hospitalization cost. Logistic regression models and generalized linear models were used to assess the impact of treatment type on the main outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 1752 patients with TbAD, 54.3% underwent OSR and 45.7% underwent TEVAR. Patients in the TEVAR group were older [median age, 64 (IQR 54-73) vs. 59 (IQR 49-70), P < 1] and more likely to have preexisting comorbidities. IAE rates were 78.6% for the OSR group compared to 43.1% for the TEVAR group, P < 0.001. Patients in the OSR group showed significantly higher in-hospital mortality (15.3% vs. 5.9%, P < 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, OSR was associated with a 5-fold increase in IAE [aOR(95%CI): 4.8 (3.8-6.1), P < 0.001] and a 3-fold increase in in-hospital mortality [aOR(95%CI): 3.3 (2.1-5.1), P < 0.001]. In regards to charges related to the hospital stay, total cost was significantly higher among patients undergoing OSR $53,371 ($39,029-$80,471) vs. TEVAR $45,311 ($31,479-$67,960), P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: The present study shows that TEVAR presents an advantage in terms of morbidity, mortality and cost when compared to OSR in the treatment of TbAD. However, long-term cost-effectiveness of both procedures remains unknown. Further research is warranted to see whether the superiority of TEVAR is maintained over time.

Popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injuries in trauma study.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic popliteal vascular injuries are associated with the highest risk of limb loss of all peripheral vascular injuries. A method to evaluate the predictors of amputation is needed because previous scores could not be validated. In the present study, we aimed to provide a simplified scoring system (POPSAVEIT [popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injuries in trauma]) that could be used preoperatively to risk stratify patients with traumatic popliteal vascular injuries for amputation. METHODS: A review of patients sustaining traumatic popliteal artery injuries was performed. Patients requiring amputation were compared with those with limb salvage at the last follow-up. Of these patients, 80% were randomly assigned to a training group for score generation and 20% to a testing group for validation. Significant predictors of amputation (P < .1) on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable analysis. Those with P < .05 on multivariable analysis were assigned points according to the relative value of their odds ratios (ORs). Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to determine low- vs high-risk scores. An area under the curve of >0.65 was considered adequate for validation. RESULTS: A total of 355 patients were included, with an overall amputation rate of 16%. On multivariate regression analysis, the risk factors independently associated with amputation in the final model were as follows: systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg (OR, 3.2; P = .027; 1 point), associated orthopedic injury (OR, 4.9; P = .014; 2 points), and a lack of preoperative pedal Doppler signals (OR, 5.5; P = .002; 2 points [or 1 point for a lack of palpable pedal pulses if Doppler signal data were unavailable]). A score of ≥3 was found to maximize the sensitivity (85%) and specificity (49%) for a high risk of amputation. The receiver operating characteristic curve for the validation group had an area under the curve of 0.750, meeting the threshold for score validation. CONCLUSIONS: The POPSAVEIT score provides a simple and practical method to effectively stratify patients preoperatively into low- and high-risk major amputation categories.

Functional ambulatory status as a potential adjunctive decision-making tool following wound, level of ischemia, and severity of foot infection assessment.

The Society for Vascular Surgery Lower Extremity Threatened Limb Classification System has been developed to stratify amputation risk on the basis of extent of the wound, level of ischemia, and severity of foot infection (WIfI). However, there are no currently validated metrics to assess, grade, and consider functional status, especially ambulatory status, as a major consideration during limb salvage efforts. Therefore, we propose an adjunct to the current WIfI system to include the patient's ambulatory functional status after initial assessment of limb threat. We propose a functional ambulatory score divided into grade 0, ambulation outside the home with or without an assistive device; grade 1, ambulation within the home with or without an assistive device; grade 2, minimal ambulation, limbs used for transfers; and grade 3, a person who is bed-bound. Adding ambulatory function as a supplementary assessment tool can guide clinical decision making to achieve optimal future functional ambulatory outcome, a patient-centered goal as critical as limb preservation. This adjunct may aid limb preservation teams in rapid, effective communication and clinical decision making after initial WIfI assessment. It may also improve efforts toward patient-centered care and functional ambulatory outcome as a primary objective. We suggest a score of functional ambulatory status should be included in future trials of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia.