A 10-Year Analysis of Representation of Women in Patent Applications and NIH Funding in Vascular Surgery.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increasing focus on gender disparities in the medical field and in the field of vascular surgery specifically. We aimed to characterize gender representation in vascular surgery innovation over the past 10 years, using metrics of patents and National Institutes of Health (NIH) support. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all vascular-related patent filings (Google Scholar) and NIH-funded grants (NIH RePORTER) over a 10-year period (January 1st, 2012, to December 31st, 2021). Gender-API (Application Programming Interface) was used to identify the gender of the inventors, with manual confirmation of a 10% random sample. Gender representation for patent inventors and grant principal investigators (PIs) were compared using Chi-squared and Student's t-tests as appropriate. Yearly temporal changes in representation were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and linear regression analyses. RESULTS: We identified 2,992 unique vascular device patents with 6,093 associated inventors over 10 years. Women were underrepresented in patent authorship overall (11.5%), and were least likely to be listed as first inventor (8.9%) and most commonly fourth and fifth inventors (15.5% and 14.1%, respectively) compared to men. There was no significant change in representation of women inventors over time (-0.2% females per year, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.54 to 0.10). We identified 1736 total unique NIH grants, with 23.8% of funded projects having women PIs. There was an increase in the proportion of women PIs over time (+1.31% per year, 95% CI 0.784 to 1.855; P < 0.001). Projects with women PIs received mean total awards that were significantly lower than projects with men PIs ($350,485 ± $220,072 vs. $451,493 ± $411,040; P < 0.001), but the overall ratio of funding:women investigators improved over time (+$11,531 per year, 95% CI $6,167 to $16,895; P = 0.0011). CONCLUSIONS: While we have made strides in increasing the number of women in the surgical research space, there is still room for improvement in funding parity. In addition, we found substantial and persistent room for improvement in representation of women in surgical innovation. As we enter a new frontier of surgery hallmarked by equalizing gender representation, these data should serve as a call-to-action for initiative aimed at rebuilding the foundation of surgical innovations upon equal gender representation.

Practice patterns surrounding the use of tibial interventions for claudication in the Medicare population.

OBJECTIVE: At present, no data are available to support the use of tibial interventions in the treatment of claudication. We characterized the practice patterns surrounding tibial peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) for patients with claudication in the United States. METHODS: Using 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims from 2017 to 2019, we conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent an index PVI for claudication. Patients with any previous PVI, acute limb ischemia, or chronic limb-threatening ischemia in the preceding 12 months were excluded. The primary outcome was the receipt or delivery of tibial revascularization during an index PVI for claudication, defined as tibial PVI with or without concomitant femoropopliteal PVI. Univariable comparisons and multivariable hierarchical logistic regression were used to assess the patient and physician characteristics associated with the use of tibial PVI for claudication. RESULTS: Of 59,930 Medicare patients who underwent an index PVI for claudication between 2017 and 2019, 16,594 (27.7%) underwent a tibial PVI (isolated tibial PVI, 38.5%; tibial PVI with concomitant femoropopliteal PVI, 61.5%). Of the 1542 physicians included in our analysis, the median physician-level tibial PVI rate was 20.0% (interquartile range, 9.1%-37.5%). Hierarchical logistic regression suggested that patient-level characteristics associated with tibial PVI for claudication included male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.23), increasing age (aOR, 1.30-1.96), Black race (aOR, 1.47), Hispanic ethnicity (aOR, 1.86), diabetes (aOR, 1.36), no history of hypertension (aOR, 1.12), and never-smoking status (aOR, 1.64; P < .05 for all). Physician-level characteristics associated with tibial PVI for claudication included early-career status (aOR, 2.97), practice location in the West (aOR, 1.75), high-volume PVI practice (aOR, 1.87), majority of practice in an ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory setting (aOR, 2.37), and physician specialty. The odds of vascular surgeons performing tibial PVI were significantly lower compared with radiologists (aOR, 2.98) and cardiologists (aOR, 1.67; P < .05 for all). The average Medicare reimbursement per patient was dramatically higher for physicians performing high rates of tibial PVI (quartile 4 vs quartile 1-3, $12,023.96 vs $692.31 per patient; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Tibial PVI for claudication was performed more often by nonvascular surgeons in high-volume practices and high-reimbursement settings. Thus, a critical need exists to reevaluate the indications, education, and reimbursement policies surrounding these procedures.

Transcarotid artery revascularization is associated with similar outcomes to carotid endarterectomy regardless of patient risk status.

BACKGROUND: Carotid artery stenting (CAS), including both transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), reimbursement has been limited to high-risk patients by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) since 2005. We aimed to assess the association of CMS high-risk status with perioperative outcomes for carotid endarterectomy (CEA), TFCAS, and TCAR. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all Vascular Quality Initiative patients who underwent carotid revascularization between 2015 and 2020. Patients were stratified by whether they met CMS CAS criteria, and univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association of procedure type (CEA, TFCAS, TCAR) with perioperative outcomes. RESULTS: Of 124,531 individuals who underwent carotid revascularization procedures, 91,687 (73.6%) underwent CEA, 17,247 (13.9%) underwent TFCAS, and 15,597 (12.5%) underwent TCAR. Among patients who met the CMS CAS criteria (ie, high-risk patients), the incidence of perioperative stroke was 2.7% for CEA, 3.4% for TFCAS, and 2.4% for TCAR (P < .001). Among standard-risk patients, the incidence of perioperative stroke was 1.7% for CEA, 2.7% for TFCAS, and 1.8% for TCAR (P < .001). After adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, the odds of perioperative stroke were lower for TCAR versus CEA in high-risk patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.99) and similar in standard-risk patients (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84, 1.31). In contrast, the adjusted odds of perioperative stroke were higher for TFCAS versus CEA in high-risk patients (aOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.03-1.46) and standard-risk patients (aOR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.37-1.86). In both populations, TFCAS and TCAR patients had significantly lower odds of myocardial infarction than CEA patients (both P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The perioperative risks associated with CEA, TFCAS, and TCAR in high-risk patients support the current CMS criteria, although the risks associated with each revascularization approach in standard-risk patients suggest that distinguishing TCAR from TFCAS may be warranted.

Index atherectomy peripheral vascular interventions performed for claudication are associated with more reinterventions than nonatherectomy interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Despite limited evidence supporting atherectomy alone over stenting/angioplasty as the index peripheral vascular intervention (PVI), the use of atherectomy has rapidly increased in recent years. We previously identified a wide distribution of atherectomy practice patterns among US physicians. The aim of this study was to investigate the association of index atherectomy with reintervention. METHODS: We used 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify all beneficiaries who underwent elective first-time femoropopliteal PVI for claudication between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019. Subsequent PVI reinterventions were examined through June 30, 2021. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare rates of PVI reinterventions for patients who received index atherectomy versus nonatherectomy procedures. Reintervention rates were also described for physicians by their overall atherectomy use (by quartile). A hierarchical Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate patient and physician-level characteristics associated with reinterventions. RESULTS: A total of 15,246 patients underwent an index PVI for claudication in 2019, of which 59.7% were atherectomy. After a median of 603 days (interquartile range, 77-784 days) of follow-up, 41.2% of patients underwent a PVI reintervention, including 48.9% of patients who underwent index atherectomy versus 29.8% of patients who underwent index nonatherectomy (P < .001). Patients treated by high physician users of atherectomy (quartile 4) received more reinterventions than patients treated by standard physician users (quartiles 1-3) (56.8% vs 39.6%; P < .001). After adjustment, patient factors association with PVI reintervention included receipt of index atherectomy (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.46), Black race (vs White; aHR; 1.18; 95% CI, 1.03-1.34), diabetes (aHR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.21), and urban residence (aHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.22). Physician factors associated with reintervention included male sex (aHR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.12-2.04), high-volume PVI practices (aHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.10-1.37), and physicians with a high use of index atherectomy (aHR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.27-1.74). Vascular surgeons had a lower risk of PVI reintervention than cardiologists (vs vascular; aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09-1.38), radiologists (aHR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.31-1.83), and other specialties (aHR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.20-2.11). The location of services delivered was not associated with reintervention (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of atherectomy as an index PVI for claudication is associated with higher PVI reintervention rates compared with nonatherectomy procedures. Similarly, high physician users of atherectomy perform more PVI reinterventions than their peers. The appropriateness of using atherectomy for initial treatment of claudication needs critical reevaluation.

Evaluation of a Physician Peer-Benchmarking Intervention for Practice Variability and Costs for Endovenous Thermal Ablation.

Importance: The frequency of use of endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) to treat chronic venous insufficiency has increased rapidly in the US. Wide variability in EVTA use among physicians has been documented, and standard EVTA rates were defined in the 2017 Medicare database. Objective: To assess whether providing individualized physician performance reports is associated with reduced variability in EVTA use and cost savings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective quality improvement study used data from all US Medicare patients aged 18 years or older who underwent at least 1 EVTA between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2017, and between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019. All US physicians who performed at least 11 EVTAs yearly for Medicare patients in 2017 and 2019 were included in the assessment. Intervention: A performance report comprising individual physician EVTA use per patient with peer-benchmarking data was distributed to all physicians in November 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The mean number of EVTAs performed per patient was calculated for each physician. Physicians who performed 3.4 or more EVTA procedures per patient per year were considered outliers. The change in the number of procedures from 2017 to 2019 was analyzed overall and by inlier and outlier status. An economic analysis was also performed to estimate the cost savings associated with the intervention. Results: A total of 188 976 patients (102 222 in 2017 and 86 754 in 2019) who had an EVTA performed by 1558 physicians were included in the analysis. The median patient age was 72.2 years (IQR, 67.9-77.8 years); 67.3% of patients were female, and 84.9% were White. Among all physicians, the mean (SD) number of EVTAs per patient decreased from 2017 to 2019 (1.97 [0.85] vs 1.89 [0.77]; P < .001). There was a modest decrease in the mean number of EVTAs per patient among inlier physicians (1.83 [0.57] vs 1.78 [0.55]; P < .001) and a more substantial decrease among outlier physicians (4.40 [1.01] vs 3.67 [1.41] ; P < .001). Outliers in 2017 consisted of 90 physicians, of whom 71 (78.9%) reduced their EVTA use after the intervention. The number of EVTAs per patient decreased by a mean (SD) of 0.09 (0.46) procedures overall (median, 0.10 procedures [IQR, -0.10 to 0.30 procedures]; P < .001). The estimated cost savings associated with the decrease was $6.3 million in 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, substantial variability in the number of EVTAs performed per patient was observed across the US. When physicians were provided with a 1-time peer-benchmarked performance report card, the timing of the intervention was associated with a significant decrease in the number of EVTAs performed per patient, particularly among outlier physicians. This quality improvement initiative was associated with reduced variability in EVTA use in the US and a substantial savings for Medicare.

Artificial intelligence in trauma systems.

Local trauma care and regional trauma systems are data-rich environments that are amenable to machine learning, artificial intelligence, and big-data analysis mechanisms to improve timely access to care, to measure outcomes, and to improve quality of care. Pilot work has been done to demonstrate that these methods are useful to predict patient flow at individual centers, so that staffing models can be adapted to match workflow. Artificial intelligence has also been proven useful in the development of regional trauma systems as a tool to determine the optimal location of a new trauma center based on trauma-patient geospatial injury data and to minimize response times across the trauma network. Although the utility of artificial intelligence is apparent and proven in small pilot studies, its operationalization across the broader trauma system and trauma surgery space has been slow because of cost, stakeholder buy-in, and lack of expertise or knowledge of its utility. Nevertheless, as new trauma centers or systems are developed, or existing centers are retooled, machine learning and sophisticated analytics are likely to be important components to help facilitate decision-making in a wide range of areas, from determining bedside nursing and provider ratios to determining where to locate new trauma centers or emergency medical services teams.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Costs Associated With Revision Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Spine Diseases.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of a prospective database. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine cost and outcomes of revision cervical spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Revision rates for cervical spine surgery are steadily increasing. It is important to counsel patients on expected results following a revision procedure. However, outcomes and cost of these procedures are poorly defined in the literature. METHODS: Patients undergoing revision cervical spine surgery at a single institution were included between October 2010 and January 2016 in a prospective registry database. Patients were divided into three cohorts depending on their etiology for revision, including recurrent disease, pseudoarthrosis, or adjacent segment disease. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including Neck Disability Index (NDI), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score, numeric rating scale-neck pain (NRS-NP), and numeric rating scale-arm pain (NRS-AP), were measured at baseline and 12 months following revision surgery. Mean costs at 12 months following revision surgery were also calculated. Satisfaction was determined by the NASS patient satisfaction index. Variables were compared using Student t test. RESULTS: A total of 115 patients underwent cervical revision surgery for recurrent disease (n = 21), pseudoarthrosis (n = 45), and adjacent segment disease (n = 49). There was significant improvement in all patient-reported outcomes at 12 months following surgery regardless of etiology (P < 0.0001). Total cost of revision surgery ranged between 21,294 ±â€Š8614 and 23,914 ±â€Š15,396 depending on pathology. No significant differences were seen between costs among different revision groups (P = 0.53). Satisfaction was met in 75.5% to 85.7% (P = 0.21) of patients depending on the etiology of the revision need. Complication rates were between 4% and 9%. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first studies to determine costs and outcome measures in the setting of cervical spine revision surgery. On the basis of our analysis, a majority of patients can expect to receive some benefit by 12 months and are satisfied with their procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Elective Surgery for Intradural Extramedullary Spinal Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare resource utilization and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for intradural extramedullary (IDEM) spine tumors are not well reported. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the PROs, costs, and resource utilization 1 year following surgical resection of IDEM tumors. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective spine surgery for IDEM tumors and enrolled in a single-center, prospective, longitudinal registry were analyzed. Baseline and postoperative 1-year PROs were recorded. One-year spine-related direct and indirect healthcare resource utilization was assessed. One-year resource use was multiplied by unit costs based on Medicare national payment amounts (direct cost). Patient and caregiver workday losses were multiplied by the self-reported gross-of-tax wage rate (indirect cost). RESULTS: A total of 38 IDEM tumor patients were included in this analysis. There was significant improvement in quality of life (EuroQol-5D), disability (Oswestry and Neck Disability Indices), pain (Numeric rating scale pain scores for back/neck pain and leg/arm pain), and general physical and mental health (Short-form-12 health survey, physical and mental component scores) in both groups 1 year after surgery (P < .0001). Eighty-seven percent (n = 33) of patients were satisfied with surgery. The 1-year postdischarge resource utilization including healthcare visits, medication, and diagnostic cost was $4111 ± $3596. The mean total direct cost was $23 717 ± $7412 and indirect cost was $5544 ± $4336, resulting in total 1-year cost $29 177 ± $9314. CONCLUSION: Surgical resection of the IDEM provides improvement in patient-reported quality of life, disability, pain, general health, and satisfaction at 1 year following surgery. Furthermore, we report the granular costs of surgical resection and healthcare resource utilization in this population.

Effect of obesity on cost per quality-adjusted life years gained following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in elective degenerative pathology.

BACKGROUND: Obese patients have greater comorbidities along with higher risk of complications and greater costs after spine surgery, which may result in increased cost and lower quality of life compared with their non-obese counterparts. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to determine cost-utility following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in obese patients. STUDY DESIGN: This study analyzed prospectively collected data. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients undergoing elective ACDF for degenerative cervical pathology at a single academic institution were included in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were the outcome measures. METHODS: One- and two-year medical resource utilization, missed work, and health state values (QALYs) were assessed. Two-year resource use was multiplied by unit costs based on Medicare national payment amounts (direct cost). Patient and caregiver workday losses were multiplied by the self-reported gross-of-tax wage rate (indirect cost). Total cost (direct+indirect) was used to compute cost per QALY gained. Patients were defined as obese for body mass index (BMI) ≥35 based on the WHO definition of class II obesity. A subgroup analysis was conducted in morbidly obese patients (BMI≥40). RESULTS: There were significant improvements in pain (neck pain or arm pain), disability (Neck Disability Index), and quality of life (EuroQol-5D and Short Form-12) at 2 years after surgery (p<.001). There was no significant difference in post-discharge health-care resource utilization, direct cost, indirect cost, and total cost between obese and non-obese patients at postoperative 1-year and 2-year follow-up. Mean 2-year direct cost for obese patients was $19,225±$8,065 and $17,635±$6,413 for non-obese patients (p=.14). There was no significant difference in the mean total 2-year cost between obese ($23,144±$9,216) and non-obese ($22,183±$10,564) patients (p=.48). Obese patients had a lower mean cumulative gain in QALYs versus non-obese patients at 2-years (0.34 vs. 0.42, p=.32). Two-year cost-utility in obese ($68,070/QALY) versus non-obese patients ($52,816/QALY) was not significantly different (p=.11). Morbidly obese patients had lower QALYs gained (0.17) and higher cost per QALYs gained ($138,094/QALY) at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion provided a significant gain in health state utility in obese patients, with a mean 2-year cost-utility of $68,070 per QALYs gained, which can be considered moderately cost-effective. Morbidly obese patients had lower cost-effectiveness; however, surgery does provide a significant improvement in outcomes. Obesity, and specifically morbid obesity, should to be taken into consideration as physician and hospital reimbursements move toward a bundled model.