Estimated Health Care Utilization and Expenditures in Individuals With Heart Failure From the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) constitutes a growing burden for public health and the US health care system. While the prevalence of HF is increasing, differences in health care utilization and expenditures within various sociodemographic groups remain poorly defined. METHODS: We used the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to assess annual health care utilization and expenditures from 2012 to 2017. Health care utilization was based on the annual frequency of various health care encounters. Annual total and out-of-pocket expenditures were evaluated for hospital inpatient stays, emergency room visits, outpatient visits, office-based medical provider visits, prescribed medicines, dental visits, home health aid visits, and other medical expenses. We performed univariable and multivariable regression analysis based on patient characteristics including sociodemographic and comorbidity variables. RESULTS: Our results showed that total health care expenditures among patients with HF were $21 177 (95% CI, $18 819-$24 736) per year as compared with $5652 (95% CI, $5469-$5837) in those without HF (P<0.001). Total expenditures within the population with HF were primarily being driven by expenditures associated with inpatient hospitalizations. Increasing number of comorbid conditions was associated with significant increases in total health care expenditures. Older age, female sex, earlier study years, number of comorbidities, higher level of education, and increasing family income brackets independently raised out-of-pocket expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings of increased health care utilization and expenditures based on sex, age, increasing number of comorbidities, wealthier income status, and increased education attainment level may be used for efforts aimed at better distributing health care resources to improve health outcomes in HF.

Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Patients Supported With a Left Ventricular Assist Device: An Analysis of the UNOS Database (United Network for Organ Sharing).

BACKGROUND: Low socioeconomic status (SES) is a known risk factor for heart failure, mortality among those with heart failure, and poor post heart transplant (HT) outcomes. This study sought to determine whether SES is associated with decreased waitlist survival while on left ventricular assist device (LVADs) support and after HT. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 3361 adult patients bridged to primary HT with an LVAD between May 2004 and April 2014 were identified in the UNOS database (United Network for Organ Sharing). SES was measured using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality SES index using data from the 2014 American Community Survey. In the study cohort, SES did not have an association with the combined end point of death or delisting on LVAD support (P=0.30). In a cause-specific unadjusted model, those in the top (hazard ratio, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.11; P=0.005) and second greatest SES quartile (hazard ratio 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-2.04; P=0.01) had an increased risk of death on device support compared with the lowest SES quartile. Adjusting for clinical risk factors mitigated the increased risk. There was no association between SES and complications. Post-HT survival, both crude and adjusted, was decreased for patients in the lowest quartile of SES index compared with all other SES quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: Freedom from waitlist death or delisting was not affected by SES. Patients with a higher SES had an increased unadjusted risk of waitlist mortality during LVAD support, which was mitigated by adjusting for increased comorbid conditions. Low SES was associated with worse post-HT outcomes. Further study is needed to confirm and understand a differential effect of SES on post-transplant outcomes that was not seen during LVAD support before HT.

Assessment of a University of California, Los Angeles 4-variable risk score for advanced heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The 4-variable risk score from University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) demonstrated superior discrimination in advanced heart failure, compared to established risk scores. However, the model has not been externally validated, and its suitability as a selection tool for heart transplantation (HT) and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We calculated the UCLA risk score (based on B-type natriuretic peptide, peak VO2, New York Heart Association class, and use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker) in 180 patients referred for HT. The outcome was survival free from urgent transplantation or LVAD. The model-predicted survival was compared to Kaplan-Meier's estimated survival at 1, 2, and 3 years. Model discrimination and calibration were assessed. During a mean follow-up of 2.1 years, 37 (21%) events occurred. One-, 2- and 3-year observed event-free survival was 88%, 81%, and 75%, and the observed/predicted ratio was 0.97, 0.96, and 0.97, respectively. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve analyses demonstrated good discrimination overall (1-year area under curve, 0.801; 2-year, 0.774; 3-year, 0.837), but discrimination between the 2 highest risk groups was poor. The difference between observed and predicted survival ranged from -14 to +17 percentage points, suggesting poor model calibration. Fairly similar results were found when the analyses were repeated in 715 patients after multivariate imputation of missing data. CONCLUSIONS: The UCLA 4-variable risk model calibration was inconsistent and high-risk discrimination was poor in an external validation cohort. Further model assessment is warranted before widespread use.

Regional differences in recipient waitlist time and pre- and post-transplant mortality after the 2006 United Network for Organ Sharing policy changes in the donor heart allocation algorithm.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the impact of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) policy changes for regional differences in waitlist time and mortality before and after heart transplantation. BACKGROUND: The 2006 UNOS thoracic organ allocation policy change was implemented to allow for greater regional sharing of organs for heart transplantation. METHODS: We analyzed 36,789 patients who were listed for heart transplantation from January 1999 through April 2012. These patients were separated into 2 eras centered on the July 12, 2006 UNOS policy change. Pre- and post-transplantation characteristics were compared by UNOS regions. RESULTS: Waitlist mortality decreased nationally (up to 180 days: 13.3% vs. 7.9% after the UNOS policy change, p < 0.001) and within each region. Similarly, 2-year post-transplant mortality decreased nationally (2-year mortality: 17.3% vs. 14.6%; p < 0.001) as well as regionally. Waitlist time for UNOS status 1A and 1B candidates increased nationally 17.8 days on average (p < 0.001) with variability between the regions. The greatest increases were in Region 9 (59.2-day increase, p < 0.001) and Region 4 (41.2-day increase, p < 0.001). Although the use of mechanical circulatory support increased nearly 2.3-fold nationally in Era 2, significant differences were present on a regional basis. In Regions 6, 7, and 10, nearly 40% of those transplanted required left ventricular assist device bridging, whereas only 19.6%, 22.3%, and 15.5% required a left ventricular assist device in regions 3, 4, and 5, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The 2006 UNOS policy change has resulted in significant regional heterogeneity with respect to waitlist time and reliance on mechanical circulatory support as a bridge to transplantation, although overall both waitlist mortality and post-transplant survival are improved.

Preoperative assessment of high-risk candidates to predict survival after heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Alternate waiting list strategies expand listing criteria for patients awaiting heart transplantation (HTx). We retrospectively analyzed clinical events and outcome of patients listed as high-risk recipients for HTx. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 822 adult patients who underwent HTx of whom 111 patients met high-risk criteria. Clinical data were collected from medical records and outcome factors calculated for 61 characteristics. Significant factors were summarized in a prognostic score. Age >65 years (67%) and amyloidosis (19%) were the most common reasons for alternate listing. High-risk recipients were older (63.2±10.2 versus 51.4±11.8 years; P<0.001), had more renal dysfunction, prior cancer, and smoking. Survival analysis revealed lower post-HTx survival in high-risk recipients (82.2% versus 87.4% at 1-year; 59.8% versus 76.3% at 5-year post-HTx; P=0.0005). Prior cerebral vascular accident, albumin <3.5 mg/dL, re-HTx, renal dysfunction (glomerular filtration rate <40 mL/min), and >2 prior sternotomies were associated with poor survival after HTx. A prognostic risk score (CARRS [CVA, albumin, re-HTx, renal dysfunction, and sternotomies]) derived from these factors stratified survival post-HTx in high-risk (3+ points) versus low-risk (0-2 points) patients (87.9% versus 52.9% at 1-year; 65.9% versus 28.4% at 5-year post-HTx; P<0.001). Low-risk alternate patients had survival comparable with regular patients (87.9% versus 87.0% at 1-year and 65.9% versus 74.5% at 5-year post-HTx; P=0.46). CONCLUSIONS: High-risk patients had reduced survival compared with regular patients post-HTx. Among patients previously accepted for alternate donor listing, application of the CARRS score identifies patients with unacceptably high mortality after HTx and those with a survival similar to regularly listed patients.

Volumetric intravascular ultrasound assessment of mechanisms and results of stent expansion in heart transplant patients.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention with stent placement for the treatment of patients with cardiac allograft vasculopathy is common, but data regarding stent behavior in this setting is lacking. OBJECTIVES: We investigated mechanisms and potential differences in stent expansion among transplant patients vs. patients with native coronary artery atherosclerotic disease ("controls"). METHODS: We compared pre- and poststent intravascular ultrasound in 12 transplant patients (17 lesions) and 33 control patients (34 lesions) matched according to age (60.1 ± 9.2 years), diabetes mellitus, and lesion location. Planar and volumetric analysis was conducted for every 1 mm at the lesion site as well as the first 5 mm proximal and distal to the stent edge. Focal stent expansion was defined as minimum stent area (MSA) divided by mean reference lumen area. Diffuse stent expansion was defined as mean stent area divided by mean reference lumen area. RESULTS: Transplant patients had more plaque than "controls" prestenting, but similar MSA and focal and diffuse stent expansion afterwards. The increase in mean lumen area correlated with the increase in mean vessel area in both groups, transplant (R = 0.64, P = 0.008) and controls (R = 0.70, P < 0.0001), but correlated inversely with changes in mean plaque area only in the transplant group (R = 0.55, P = 0.027). There were no differences in calcification between the two groups and no axial plaque distribution from the lesion into the reference segments in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The mechanism of stent expansion in transplant vasculopathy appears to be similar to de novo atherosclerosis-i.e., mainly vessel expansion to achieve similar acute results.

Morbidity and mortality of UNOS status 1B cardiac transplant candidates at home.

BACKGROUND: On January 20, 1999, UNOS listing regulations changed, allowing stable patients on inotropic support (Status IB) to be discharged home until cardiac transplant. The outcome, morbidity and cost savings of this new strategy has not been evaluated. METHODS: From 1/20/99 through 1/1/01, 155 patients were classified as UNOS Status 1B at our institution; 64 patients were never discharged and 91 were discharged home. Criteria for discharge were hemodynamic stability on low-dose, single-agent parenteral inotropic infusion, defined as dobutamine at a dose <7.5 microg/kg/min or milrinone <0.5 microg/kg/min. Data on re-admissions were collected prospectively. The frequency of complex ventricular arrhythmias was evaluated in a sub-group discharged with external or internal cardiodefibrillators (n = 38). RESULTS: Total Status I time to transplant for the 91 discharged patients was 139 +/- 91 days, with 87 +/- 67 days spent at home. Inpatient time to transplant was still high, with a mean of 51 +/- 45 days. The in-hospital time was comparable to that of the 64 patients who were never discharged (51 +/- 41 days). Fifty-nine percent of discharged patients were re-admitted, with 37% of patients requiring more than 1 admission. Sixty-six percent of admissions were for worsening heart failure (CHF), and 34% for infection or occlusion of the indwelling intravenous line. No significant arrhythmic events were recorded in the 38 patients who had internal or external cardiodefibrillators. Two patients died suddenly at home. One patient had declined to wear the external cardiodefibrillator. The other patient was not wearing the defibrillator at the time of the event, and in 634 hours of previous monitoring he had had no events. CONCLUSIONS: In UNOS Status 1B patients awaiting cardiac transplant on home inotropic therapy, mortality remains low but the re-admission rate was high. There appeared to be a low incidence of complex ventricular arrhythmias.