Predictors and In-Hospital Outcomes Among Patients Using a Single Versus Bilateral Mammary Arteries in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

The benefit of bilateral mammary artery (BIMA) use during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) continues to be debated. This study examined nationwide trends in BIMA use and factors influencing its utilization. Using the National Inpatient Sample, adults undergoing isolated multivessel CABG between 2005 and 2015 were identified and stratified based on the use of a single mammary artery or BIMA. Regression models were fit to identify patient and hospital level predictors of BIMA use and characterize the association of BIMA on outcomes including sternal infection, mortality, and resource utilization. An estimated 4.5% (n = 60,698) of patients underwent CABG with BIMA, with a steady increase from 3.8% to 5.0% over time (p<0.001). Younger age, male gender, and elective admission, were significant predictors of BIMA use. Moreover, private insurance was associated with higher odds of BIMA use (adjusted odds ratio 1.24) compared with Medicare. BIMA use was not a predictor of postoperative sternal infection, in-hospital mortality, or hospitalization costs. Overall, BIMA use remains uncommon in the United States despite no significant differences in acute postoperative outcomes. Several patient, hospital, and socioeconomic factors appear to be associated with BIMA utilization.

Understanding lung transplant listing practices: Survival in lung transplant candidates who improve clinically to delisting.

BACKGROUND: Occasionally, lung transplant candidates improve to the point where they are removed from the transplant list. We sought to determine the characteristics and outcomes of lung transplant candidates who improved to delisting both before and after implementation of the lung allocation score. METHODS: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we reviewed all adult patients listed for lung transplant between 1987 and 2012. The last permanent status change was classified into transplanted, improved to delisting (improved), or deteriorated to delisting (deteriorated). Survival time was calculated using the linked date of death from the Social Security Administration. Survival analysis was performed via the Kaplan-Meier method, and adjusted multivariable logistic regressions identified characteristics predicting improvement to delisting. RESULTS: Of 13,688 candidates, 12,188 (89.0%) were transplanted, 454 (3.3%) improved, and 1,046 (7.6%) deteriorated. The 5-year mortality was greater in improved (hazard ratio = 1.21 [1.07-1.38], P = .002) and deteriorated (hazard ratio = 3.36 [3.11-3.64], P < .001) candidates relative to those transplanted; however, 1-year survival was greater in improved versus transplanted candidates (75.9% vs 67.2%, log rank P < .001). Older, female patients listed for primary pulmonary hypertension and retransplantation were more likely to improve to delisting. The proportion of improved patients varied by hospital quartile volume (P < .001) and the United Network for Organ Sharing geographic region (P < .001). The number of patients improving to delisting decreased after implementation of the lung allocation score. CONCLUSION: Lung transplant candidates improving to delisting faced less short-term but greater long-term mortality relative to transplanted candidates. Given that the improved population decreased dramatically after implementation of the lung allocation score, redefining patient listing criteria appears to have improved patient appropriateness for transplant.