Short-Term Out-of-Pocket and Total Costs of Care After Ablation, Resection, or Transplant for Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A National SEER-Medicare Cost Comparison.

Background: Differences in survival and morbidity among treatment options (ablation, surgical resection, and transplant) for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been well-studied. Additional understanding of the costs of such care would help to identify drivers of high costs and potential barriers to care delivery. Objective: To quantify total and patient out-of-pocket costs for ablation, surgical resection, and transplant in the management of early-stage HCC and to identify factors predictive of these costs. Methods: This retrospective U.S. population-based study used the SEER-Medicare linked dataset to identify a sample of 1067 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 73 years; 674 men, 393 women) diagnosed with early-stage HCC (size ≤5 cm) treated with ablation (N=623), resection (N=201), or transplant (N=243) between January 2009 and December 2016. Total costs and patient out-of-pocket costs for the index procedure as well as for any care within 30 days and 90 days post-procedure were identified and stratified by treatment modality. Additional comparisons were performed among propensity-score matched subgroups of patients treated by ablation or resection (each N=172). Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify factors predictive of total costs and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30-day and 90-day post-procedure periods. Results: For ablation, resection, and transplant, median index-procedure total cost was $6689, $25,614, and $66,034; index-procedure out-of-pocket cost was $1235, $1650, and $1317; 30-day total cost was $9456, $29,754, and $69,856; 30-day out-of-pocket cost was $1646, $2208, and $3198; 90-day total cost was $14,572, $34,984, and $88,103; and 90-day out-of-pocket cost was $2138, $2462, and $3876, respectively (all p<.001). In propensity-matched subgroups, ablation and resection had median index-procedure, 30-day, and 90-day total costs of $6690 and $25,716, $9995 and $30,365, and $15,851 and $34,455, respectively. In multivariable analysis adjusting for socioeconomic factors, comorbidities, and liver-disease prognostic indicators, surgical treatment (resection or transplant) was predictive of significantly greater costs compared with ablation at all time points. Conclusion: Total and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30-day and 90-day post-procedure periods were lowest for ablation, followed by resection and then transplant. Clinical Impact: This comprehensive cost analysis could help inform future cost-effectiveness analyses.

Predictors for Early Liver Cancer Survival After Ablation and Surgical Resection: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare Study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify independent predictors of all-cause and cancer-specific mortality after ablation or surgical resection (SR) for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), after adjusting for key confounders. METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare, HCCs less than 5 cm treated with ablation or SR in 2009 to 2016 (n = 956) were identified. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression models for all-cause and cancer-specific mortality were performed including demographics, clinical factors (tumor size, medical comorbidities, and liver disease factors), social determinants of health, and treatment characteristics. We also determined the most influential predictors of survival using a random forest analysis. RESULTS: Larger tumor size (3-5 cm) is predictive of all-cause (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, P = .002) and cancer-specific mortality (HR 1.59, P < .001). Furthermore, chronic kidney disease is predictive of all-cause mortality (HR 1.43, P = .013), though it is not predictive of cancer-specific death. Multiple liver disease factors are predictive of all-cause and cancer-specific mortality including portal hypertension and esophageal varices (HRs > 1, P < .05). Though Asian race is protective in univariate models, in fully adjusted, multivariable models, Asian race is not a significant protective factor. Likewise, other social determinants of health are not significantly predictive of all-cause or cancer-specific mortality. Finally, treatment with SR, in later procedure years or at high-volume centers, is protective for all-cause and cancer-specific mortality. In machine learning models, year procedure was performed, ascites, portal hypertension, and treatment choice were the most influential factors. DISCUSSION: Treatment characteristics, liver disease factors, and tumor size are more important predictors of all-cause and cancer-specific death than social determinants of health for small HCCs.

Beyond Survival: Adverse Events and Care Delivery Outcomes after Early Liver Cancer Treatment in a Nationally Representative Cohort.

PURPOSE: To compare secondary outcomes after ablation (AB), surgical resection (SR), and liver transplant (LT) for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), including resource utilization and adverse event (AE) rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-Medicare, HCCs <5 cm that were treated with AB, SR, or LT in 2009-2016 (n = 1,067) were identified using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes through Medicare claims. Index procedure length of stay, need for intensive care unit (ICU) level care, readmission rates, and AE rates at 30 and 90 days were compared using chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests. Examined AEs included hemorrhage, abscess formation, biliary injury, pneumonia, sepsis, liver disease-related AEs, liver failure, and anesthesia-related AEs, identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/10th Revision, codes. RESULTS: The median length of stay for initial treatment was 1 day, 6 days, and 7 days for AB, SR, and LT, respectively (P < .001). During initial hospital stay, 5.0%, 40.8%, and 63.4% of AB, SR, and LT cohorts, respectively, received ICU-level care (P < .001). By 30 and 90 days, there were significant differences among the AB, SR, and LT cohorts in the rate of postprocedural hemorrhage, abscess formation, biliary injury, pneumonia, sepsis, liver disease-related AEs, and anesthesia-related AEs (P < .05). By 90 days, the readmission rates after AB, SR, and LT were 18.6%, 28.2%, and 40.6% (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AB results in significantly less healthcare utilization during the initial 90 days after procedure compared with that after SR and LT due to shorter length of stay, lower intensity care, fewer readmissions, and fewer AEs.

Long-Term Survival After Surgery Versus Ablation for Early Liver Cancer in a Large, Nationally Representative Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To compare survival outcomes (all-cause, cancer-specific, and disease-free) for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), less than or equal to 5 cm, after ablation (AB) and surgical resection (SR) after adjusting for key confounders. Secondarily, to understand differential survival outcomes of liver transplant (TR) compared with SR and AB. METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare, HCCs less than 5 cm that were treated with AB, SR, or TR in 2009 to 2016 (n = 1,215) were identified using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes through Medicare claims. The TR group was subdivided into two groups: TR with prior treatment and TR without prior treatment. All-cause survival, cancer-specific survival, and disease-free survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and compared between groups using log-rank tests and Cox regression analyses. Propensity score-matched comparison of AB and SR groups was performed, with groups matched on demographics, social determinants of health, medical comorbidities, and liver disease severity prognostic indicators. RESULTS: Median study follow-up time was 2.71 years (interquartile range 1.25-3.83). Unadjusted 1-, 3-, and 5-year cancer-specific survivals were 85.9%, 67.6%, and 56.3% for the AB group; 91.7%, 82.6%, and 81.7% for the SR group; 93.5%, 88.7%, and 79.4% for TR without prior treatment group; and 96.4%, 93.2%, and 93.2% for TR with prior treatment group (P < .0001). With SR as the reference group, the propensity-matched hazard ratios for AB were 2.04 (95% confidence interval: 1.51-2.77) for all-cause mortality, 2.44 (95% confidence interval: 1.56-3.80) for cancer-specific mortality, and 2.12 (95% confidence interval: 1.61-2.78) for disease recurrence. DISCUSSION: SR is superior to AB for small HCCs in a large, nationally representative, modern cohort, and in secondary analysis TR was superior to both.

Percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty for pathologic vertebral fractures in the Medicare population: safer and less expensive than open surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare cost and outcomes of surgical and percutaneous treatments of pathologic vertebral fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standard Medicare 5% anonymized inpatient files (1999-2009) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with a diagnosis of vertebral fracture without spinal cord injury and primary or metastatic bony malignancy were divided into percutaneous or surgical groups based on whether they received vertebroplasty/kyphoplasty or surgical treatment. Patients who had no intervention or both interventions were excluded. Cost, length of stay, and type of discharge were examined while controlling for demographic and comorbidity variables. RESULTS: A total of 451 patients were included; 52% received percutaneous treatment and 48% received surgery. Patients treated percutaneously were older (P < .001) and more likely to be female (P = .04). Percutaneous therapy predicted $14,862 less Medicare cost and $13,565 less overall cost (P < .001 for both), and 4.1 fewer inpatient days (P < .001). Patients who underwent surgery had higher odds of death (odds ratio = 3.38, P = .016), discharge to a rehabilitation facility (odds ratio = 3.3, P = .003), and transfer to another inpatient facility (odds ratio = 8.53, P < .001), and lower odds of discharge to home (odds ratio = 0.42, P < .001) and hospice (odds ratio = 0.08, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: In a Medicare population with bony malignancy and vertebral fractures, percutaneous therapy predicted significantly reduced cost and length of stay versus surgery. Patients who underwent percutaneous therapy were significantly less likely to die, be transferred, or be discharged to rehabilitation facilities, and were more likely to be discharged to home or hospice.

Reimbursement trends for outpatient interventional radiology procedures: comparison of hospital and freestanding physician office sites of service.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare trends in reimbursement rates between hospital outpatient departments and freestanding physician offices for commonly performed interventional radiology procedures from 2006 through 2010. METHODS: Using final rules data from the 2006 and 2008 Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System for Medicare and Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, reimbursement rates were calculated for a sample of procedures commonly performed by interventional radiologists in the outpatient setting. Hospital and freestanding reimbursement rates for 2006, 2008, and 2010 (projected) were adjusted for inflation to 2008 dollars and weighted by relative procedure frequency using Medicare Part B claims data. Reimbursements for the entire sample of procedures were compared year to year, by site of service, and by payment system. Individual procedure reimbursements were also trended. RESULTS: In 2006, reimbursements for the entire procedure sample were 6% less in hospital outpatient departments than in freestanding offices. In 2008 and 2010, they are projected to be 3% and 23% greater, respectively, in hospital outpatient departments than in freestanding offices. Over the 4-year interval, reimbursements are projected to fall by 36% in freestanding offices and by 16% in hospital outpatient departments. Reimbursements to hospitals for facility costs are projected to decrease by 14%. Reimbursements to physicians for work done in hospital outpatient departments are projected to decrease by 23%. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial reductions in calculated outpatient interventional radiology practice expenses being phased in between 2006 and 2010 under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule seem to be dramatically reducing reimbursements for interventional procedures performed on outpatients, especially in freestanding offices. The impact of these practice expense reductions on interventional radiology seems to far outweigh that of the Deficit Reduction Act and other recent Medicare reimbursement changes.