Declining Medicare reimbursement in abdominal transplantation from 2000 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is a major payer for abdominal transplant services. Reimbursement reductions could have a major impact on the transplant surgical workforce and hospitals. Yet government reimbursement trends in abdominal transplantation have not been fully characterized. METHODS: We performed an economic analysis to characterize changes in inflation-adjusted trends in Medicare surgical reimbursement for abdominal transplant procedures. Using the Medicare Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool, we performed a procedure code-based surgical reimbursement rate analysis. Reimbursement rates were adjusted for inflation to calculate overall changes in reimbursement, overall year-over-year, 5-year year-over-year, and compound annual growth rate from 2000 to 2021. RESULTS: We observed declines in adjusted reimbursement of common abdominal transplant procedures, including liver (-32.4%), kidney with and without nephrectomy (-24.2% and -24.1%, respectively), and pancreas transplant (-15.2%) (all, P < .05). Overall, the yearly average change for liver, kidney with and without nephrectomy, and pancreas transplant were -1.54%, -1.15%, -1.15%, and -0.72%. Five-year annual change averaged -2.69%, -2.35%, -2.64%, and -2.43%, respectively. The overall average compound annual growth rate was -1.27%. CONCLUSION: This analysis depicts a worrisome reimbursement pattern for abdominal transplant procedures. Transplant surgeons, centers, and professional organizations should note these trends to advocate sustainable reimbursement policy and to preserve continued access to transplant services.

Cardiorespiratory Fitness (Peak Oxygen Uptake): Safe and Effective Measure for Cardiovascular Screening Before Kidney Transplant.

BACKGROUND: Significant heterogeneity exists in practice patterns and algorithms used for cardiac screening before kidney transplant. Cardiorespiratory fitness, as measured by peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak), is an established validated predictor of future cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in both healthy and diseased populations. The literature supports its use among asymptomatic patients in abrogating the need for further cardiac testing. METHODS AND RESULTS: We outlined a pre-renal transplant screening algorithm to incorporate VO2peak testing among a population of asymptomatic high-risk patients (with diabetes mellitus and/or >50 years of age). Only those with VO2peak <17 mL/kg per minute (equivalent to <5 metabolic equivalents) underwent further noninvasive cardiac screening tests. We conducted a retrospective study of the a priori dichotomization of the VO2peak <17 versus ≥17 mL/kg per minute to determine negative and positive predictive value of future cardiac events and all-cause mortality. We report a high (>90%) negative predictive value, indicating that VO2peak ≥17 mL/kg per minute is effective to rule out future cardiac events and all-cause mortality. However, lower VO2peak had low positive predictive value and should not be used as a reliable metric to predict future cardiac events and/or mortality. In addition, a simple mathematical calculation documented a cost savings of ≈$272 600 in the cardiac screening among our study cohort of 637 patients undergoing evaluation for kidney and/or pancreas transplant. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that incorporating an objective measure of cardiorespiratory fitness with VO2peak is safe and allows for a cost savings in the cardiovascular screening protocol among higher-risk phenotype (with diabetes mellitus and >50 years of age) being evaluated for kidney transplant.

Hospitalizations for Cardiovascular Disease After Liver Transplantation in the United States.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of post-liver transplant death, and variable care patterns may affect outcomes. We aimed to describe epidemiology and outcomes of inpatient CVD care across US hospitals. Using a merged data set from the 2002-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, we evaluated liver transplant patients admitted primarily with myocardial infarction (MI), stroke (cerebrovascular accident [CVA]), congestive heart failure (CHF), dysrhythmias, cardiac arrest (CA), or malignant hypertension. Patient-level data include demographics, Charlson comorbidity index, and CVD diagnoses. Facility-level variables included ownership status, payer-mix, hospital resources, teaching status, and physician/nursing-to-bed ratios. We used generalized estimating equations to evaluate patient- and hospital-level factors associated with mortality. There were 4763 hospitalizations that occurred in 153 facilities (transplant hospitals, n = 80). CVD hospitalizations increased overall by 115% over the decade (P < 0.01). CVA and MI declined over time (both P < 0.05), but CHF and dysrhythmia grew significantly (both P < 0.03); a total of 19% of hospitalizations were for multiple CVD diagnoses. Transplant hospitals had lower comorbidity patients (P < 0.001) and greater resource intensity including presence of cardiac intensive care unit, interventional radiology, operating rooms, teaching status, and nursing density (all P < 0.01). Transplant and nontransplant hospitals had similar unadjusted mortality (overall, 3.9%, P = 0.55; by diagnosis, all P > 0.07). Transplant hospitals had significantly longer overall length of stay, higher total costs, and more high-cost hospitalizations (all P < 0.05). After risk adjustment, transplant hospitals were associated with higher mortality and high-cost hospitalizations. In conclusion, CVD after liver transplant is evolving and responsible for growing rates of inpatient care. Transplant hospitals are associated with poor outcomes, even after risk adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, which may be attributable to selective referral of certain patient phenotypes but could also be related to differences in quality of care. Further study is warranted.

Hospital resource intensity and cirrhosis mortality in United States.

AIM: To determine whether hospital characteristics predict cirrhosis mortality and how much variation in mortality is attributable to hospital differences. METHODS: We used data from the 2005-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the American Hospital Association Annual survey to identify hospitalizations for decompensated cirrhosis and corresponding facility characteristics. We created hospital-specific risk and reliability-adjusted odds ratios for cirrhosis mortality, and evaluated patient and facility differences based on hospital performance quintiles. We used hierarchical regression models to determine the effect of these factors on mortality. RESULTS: Seventy-two thousand seven hundred and thirty-three cirrhosis admissions were evaluated in 805 hospitals. Hospital mean cirrhosis annual case volume was 90.4 (range 25-828). Overall hospital cirrhosis mortality rate was 8.00%. Hospital-adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality ranged from 0.48 to 1.89. Patient characteristics varied significantly by hospital aOR for mortality. Length of stay averaged 6.0 ± 1.6 days, and varied significantly by hospital performance (P < 0.001). Facility level predictors of risk-adjusted mortality were higher Medicaid case-mix (OR = 1.00, P = 0.029) and LPN staffing (OR = 1.02, P = 0.015). Higher cirrhosis volume (OR = 0.99, P = 0.025) and liver transplant program status (OR = 0.83, P = 0.026) were significantly associated with survival. After adjusting for patient differences, era, and clustering effects, 15.3% of variation between hospitals was attributable to differences in facility characteristics. CONCLUSION: Hospital characteristics account for a significant proportion of variation in cirrhosis mortality. These findings have several implications for patients, providers, and health care delivery in liver disease care and inpatient health care design.

Declining outcomes in simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation in the MELD era: ineffective usage of renal allografts.

BACKGROUND: When the United Network for Organ Sharing changed its algorithm for liver allocation to the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) system in 2002, highest priority shifted to patients with renal insufficiency as a major component of their end-stage liver disease. An unintended consequence of the new system was a rapid increase in the number of simultaneous liver-kidney transplants (SLK) being performed yearly. METHODS: Adult recipients of deceased donor liver transplants (LT, n=19,137), kidney transplants (n=33,712), and SLK transplants (n=1,032) between 1987 and 2006 were evaluated based on United Network for Organ Sharing data. Recipients were stratified by donor subgroup, MELD score, pre- versus post-MELD era, and length of time on dialysis. Matched-control analyses were performed, and graft and patient survival were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses. RESULTS: MELD era outcomes demonstrate a decline in patient survival after SLK. Using matched-control analysis, we are unable to demonstrate a benefit in the SLK cohort compared with LT, despite the fact that higher quality allografts are being used for SLK. Subgroup analysis of the SLK cohort did demonstrate an increase in overall 1-year patient and liver graft survival only in those patients on long-term dialysis (> or =3 months) compared with LT (84.5% vs. 70.8%, P=0.008; hazards ratio 0.57 [95% CI 0.34, 0.95], P=0.03). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that SLK may be overused in the MELD era and that current prioritization of kidney grafts to those liver failure patients results in wasting of limited resources.