The association of timing of coronary artery bypass grafting for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction and clinical outcomes in the contemporary United States.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to the timing of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention, the optimal timing of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) has not been determined. Therefore, we compared in-hospital outcomes according to different time intervals to CABG surgery in a contemporary NSTEMI population in the USA. METHODS: We identified all NSTEMI hospitalizations from 2016 to 2020 where revascularization was performed with CABG. We excluded NSTEMI with high-risk features using prespecified criteria. CABG was stratified into ≤24 h, 24-72 h, 72-120 h, and >120 h from admission. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, perioperative complications, length of stay (LOS), and hospital cost. RESULTS: A total of 147 170 NSTEMI hospitalizations where CABG was performed were assessed. A greater percentage of females, Blacks, and Hispanics experienced delays to CABG surgery. No difference in in-hospital mortality was observed, but CABG at 72-120 h and at >120 h was associated with higher odds of non-home discharge and acute kidney injury compared with CABG at ≤24 h from admission. In addition to these differences, CABG at >120 h was associated with higher odds of gastrointestinal hemorrhage and need for blood transfusion. All 3 groups with CABG delayed >24 h had longer LOS and hospital-associated costs compared with hospitalizations where CABG was performed at ≤24 h. CONCLUSION: CABG delays in patients with NSTEMI are more frequently experienced by women and minority populations and are associated with an increased burden of complications and healthcare cost.

Differences in Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction for Low- and High-Income Patients in 6 Countries.

Importance: Differences in the organization and financing of health systems may produce more or less equitable outcomes for advantaged vs disadvantaged populations. We compared treatments and outcomes of older high- and low-income patients across 6 countries. Objective: To determine whether treatment patterns and outcomes for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction differ for low- vs high-income individuals across 6 countries. Design, Setting, and Participants: Serial cross-sectional cohort study of all adults aged 66 years or older hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction from 2013 through 2018 in the US, Canada, England, the Netherlands, Taiwan, and Israel using population-representative administrative data. Exposures: Being in the top and bottom quintile of income within and across countries. Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty-day and 1-year mortality; secondary outcomes included rates of cardiac catheterization and revascularization, length of stay, and readmission rates. Results: We studied 289 376 patients hospitalized with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 843 046 hospitalized with non-STEMI (NSTEMI). Adjusted 30-day mortality generally was 1 to 3 percentage points lower for high-income patients. For instance, 30-day mortality among patients admitted with STEMI in the Netherlands was 10.2% for those with high income vs 13.1% for those with low income (difference, -2.8 percentage points [95% CI, -4.1 to -1.5]). One-year mortality differences for STEMI were even larger than 30-day mortality, with the highest difference in Israel (16.2% vs 25.3%; difference, -9.1 percentage points [95% CI, -16.7 to -1.6]). In all countries, rates of cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention were higher among high- vs low-income populations, with absolute differences ranging from 1 to 6 percentage points (eg, 73.6% vs 67.4%; difference, 6.1 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 11.0] for percutaneous intervention in England for STEMI). Rates of coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with STEMI in low- vs high-income strata were similar but for NSTEMI were generally 1 to 2 percentage points higher among high-income patients (eg, 12.5% vs 11.0% in the US; difference, 1.5 percentage points [95% CI, 1.3 to 1.8 ]). Thirty-day readmission rates generally also were 1 to 3 percentage points lower and hospital length of stay generally was 0.2 to 0.5 days shorter for high-income patients. Conclusions and Relevance: High-income individuals had substantially better survival and were more likely to receive lifesaving revascularization and had shorter hospital lengths of stay and fewer readmissions across almost all countries. Our results suggest that income-based disparities were present even in countries with universal health insurance and robust social safety net systems.

Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes in the US Medicare Program.

Background Coronary revascularization provides important long-term clinical benefits to patients with high-risk presentations of coronary artery disease, including those with chronic kidney disease. The cost-effectiveness of coronary interventions in this setting is not known. Methods and Results We developed a Markov cohort simulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with chronic kidney disease who were hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or unstable angina. Model inputs were primarily drawn from a sample of 14 300 patients identified using the Medicare 20% sample. Survival, quality-adjusted life-years, costs, and cost-effectiveness were projected over a 20-year time horizon. Multivariable models indicated higher 30-day mortality and end-stage renal disease with both PCI and CABG, and higher stroke with CABG, relative to medical therapy. However, the model projected long-term gains of 0.72 quality-adjusted life-years (0.97 life-years) for PCI compared with medical therapy, and 0.93 quality-adjusted life-years (1.32 life-years) for CABG compared with PCI. Incorporation of long-term costs resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $65 326 per quality-adjusted life-year gained for PCI versus medical therapy, and $101 565 for CABG versus PCI. Results were robust to changes in input parameters but strongly influenced by the background costs of the population, and the time horizon. Conclusions For patients with chronic kidney disease and high-risk coronary artery disease presentations, PCI and CABG were both associated with markedly increased costs as well as gains in quality-adjusted life expectancy, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios indicating intermediate value in health economic terms.

Differences in High- and Low-Value Cardiovascular Testing by Health Insurance Provider.

Background Quality of care incentives and reimbursements for cardiovascular testing differ between insurance providers. We hypothesized that there are differences in the use of guideline-concordant testing between Medicaid versus commercial insurance patients <65 years, and between Medicare Advantage versus Medicare fee-for-service patients ≥65 years. Methods and Results Using data from the Colorado All-Payer Claims Database from 2015 to 2018, we identified patients eligible to receive a high-value test recommended by guidelines: assessment of left ventricular function among patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or incident heart failure, or a low-value test that provides minimal patient benefit: stress testing prior to low-risk surgery or routine stress testing within 2 years of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Among 145 616 eligible patients, 37% had fee-for-service Medicare, 18% Medicare Advantage, 22% Medicaid, and 23% commercial insurance. Using multilevel logistic regression models adjusted for patient characteristics, Medicaid patients were less likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR], 0.84 [0.73-0.98]; P=0.03) and heart failure (OR, 0.59 [0.51-0.70]; P<0.01) compared with commercially insured patients. Medicare Advantage patients were more likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (OR, 1.35 [1.15-1.59]; P<0.01) and less likely to receive low-value testing after percutaneous coronary intervention/ coronary artery bypass graft (OR, 0.63 [0.55-0.72]; P<0.01) compared with Medicare fee-for-service patients. Conclusions Guideline-concordant testing was less likely to occur among patients with Medicaid compared with commercial insurance, and more likely to occur among patients with Medicare Advantage compared with fee-for-service Medicare. Insurance plan features may provide valuable targets to improve guideline-concordant testing.

Preparing for Bundled Payments: Impact of Complications Post-Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting on Costs.

BACKGROUND: Bundled payments for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) provide a single reimbursement for care provided from admission through 90 days post-discharge. We aim to explore the impact of complications on total institutional costs, as well as the drivers of high costs for index hospitalization. METHODS: We linked clinical and internal cost data for patients undergoing CABG from 2014 to 2017 at a single institution. We compared unadjusted average variable direct costs, reporting excess cost from an uncomplicated baseline. We stratified by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons preoperative risk and quality outcome measures as well as value-based outcomes (readmission, post-acute care utilization). We performed multivariable linear regression to evaluate drivers of high costs, adjusting for preoperative and intraoperative characteristics and postoperative complications. RESULTS: We reviewed 1789 patients undergoing CABG with an average of 2.7 vessels (SD 0.89). A significant proportion of patients were diabetic (51.2%) and obese (mean body mass index 30.6, SD 6.1). Factors associated with increased adjusted costs were preoperative renal failure (P = .001), diabetes (P = .001) and body mass index (P = .05), and postoperative stroke (P < .001), prolonged ventilation (P < .001), rebleeding requiring reoperation (P < .001) and renal failure (P < .001) with varying magnitude. Preoperative ejection fraction and insurance status were not associated with increased adjusted costs. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative characteristics had less of an impact on costs post-CABG than postoperative complications. Postoperative complications vary in their impact on internal costs, with reoperation, stroke, and renal failure having the greatest impact. In preparation for bundled payments, hospitals should focus on understanding and preventing drivers of high cost.

Minimally Invasive vs Open Coronary Surgery: A Multi-Institutional Analysis of Cost and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Limited multi-institutional data evaluating minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) outcomes have raised concern for increased resource utilization compared with standard sternotomy. The purpose of this study was to assess short-term outcomes and resource utilization with MICS CABG in a propensity-matched regional cohort. METHODS: Isolated CABG patients (2012-2019) were extracted from a regional Society of Thoracic Surgeons database. Patients were stratified by MICS CABG vs open CABG via sternotomy, propensity-score matched 1:2 to balance baseline differences, and compared by univariate analysis. RESULTS: Of 26,255 isolated coronary artery bypass graft patients, 139 MICS CABG and 278 open CABG patients were well balanced after matching. There was no difference in the operative mortality rate (2.2% open vs 0.7% MICS CABG, P = .383) or major morbidity (7.9% open vs 7.2% MICS CABG, P = .795). However, open CABG patients received more blood products (22.2% vs 12.2%, P = .013), and had longer intensive care unit (45 vs 30 hours, P = .049) as well as hospital lengths of stay (7 vs 6 days, P = .005). Finally, median hospital cost was significantly higher in the open CABG group ($35,011 vs $27,906, P < .001) compared with MICS CABG. CONCLUSIONS: Open CABG via sternotomy and MICS CABG approaches are associated with similar, excellent perioperative outcomes. However, MICS CABG was associated with fewer transfusions, shorter length of stay, and ∼$7000 lower hospital cost, a superior resource utilization profile that improves patient care and lowers cost.

Determinants of Value in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

Background Over 180 000 coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures are performed annually, accounting for $7 to $10 billion in episode expenditures. Assessing tradeoffs between spending and quality contributing to value during 90-day episodes has not been conducted but is essential for success in bundled reimbursement models. We, therefore, identified determinants of variability in hospital 90-day episode value for CABG. Methods Medicare and private payor admissions for isolated CABG from 2014 to 2016 were retrospectively linked to clinical registry data for 33 nonfederal hospitals in Michigan. Hospital composite risk-adjusted complication rates (≥1 National Quality Forum-endorsed, Society of Thoracic Surgeons measure: deep sternal wound infection, renal failure, prolonged ventilation >24 hours, stroke, re-exploration, and operative mortality) and 90-day risk-adjusted, price-standardized episode payments were used to categorize hospitals by value by defining the intersection between complications and spending. Results Among 2573 total patients, those at low- versus high-value hospitals had a higher percentage of prolonged length of stay >14 days (9.3% versus 2.4%, P=0.006), prolonged ventilation (17.6% versus 4.8%, P<0.001), and operative mortality (4.8% versus 0.6%, P=0.001). Mean total episode payments were $51 509 at low-compared with $45 526 at high-value hospitals (P<0.001), driven by higher readmission ($3675 versus $2177, P=0.005), professional ($7462 versus $6090, P<0.001), postacute care ($7315 versus $5947, P=0.031), and index hospitalization payments ($33 474 versus $30 800, P<0.001). Among patients not experiencing a complication or 30-day readmission (1923/2573, 74.7%), low-value hospitals had higher inpatient evaluation and management payments ($1405 versus $752, P<0.001) and higher utilization of inpatient rehabilitation (7% versus 2%, P<0.001), but lower utilization of home health (66% versus 73%, P=0.016) and emergency department services (13% versus 17%, P=0.034). Conclusions To succeed in emerging bundled reimbursement programs for CABG, hospitals and physicians should identify strategies to minimize complications while optimizing inpatient evaluation and management spending and use of inpatient rehabilitation, home health, and emergency department services.

Sources of Hospital Variation in Postacute Care Spending After Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postacute care is a major driver of cardiac surgical episode spending, but the sources of variation in spending have not been explored. The objective of this study was to identify sources of variation in postacute care spending within 90-days of discharge following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and aortic valve replacement (AVR) and the relationship between postacute care spending and other postdischarge utilization. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of public and private administrative claims for Michigan residents insured by Medicare fee-for-service and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan/Blue Care Network commercial and Medicare Advantage plans undergoing CABG (n=11 208) or AVR (n=6122) in 33 nonfederal acute care Michigan hospitals between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018. Postacute care use was present in 9662 (86.2%) CABG episodes and 4242 (69.3%) AVR episodes, with respective mean (SD) 90-day spending of $4398±$6124 and $3465±$5759. Across hospitals, mean postacute care spending ranged from $3280 to $8186 for CABG and $2246 to $7710 for AVR. Inpatient rehabilitation and skilled nursing facility care accounted for over 80% of the variation spending between low and high postacute care spending hospitals. At the hospital-level, postacute care spending was modestly correlated across procedures and payers. Spending associated with readmissions, emergency department visits, and outpatient facility care was significantly different between low and high postacute care spending hospitals in CABG and AVR episodes. CONCLUSIONS: There was wide hospital variation in postacute care spending after cardiac surgery, which was primarily driven by differential use and intensity in facility-based postacute care. Optimizing facility-based postacute care after cardiac surgery offers unique opportunities to reduce potentially unwarranted care variation.

Is the Use of BIMA in CABG Sub-Optimal? A Review of the Current Clinical and Economic Evidence Including Innovative Approaches to the Management of Mediastinitis.

Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has traditionally been limited. This review looks at the recent outcome data on BIMA in CABG focusing on the management of risk factors for mediastinitis, one of the potential barriers for more extensive BIMA utilization. A combination of pre-, intra- and postoperative strategies are essential to reduce mediastinitis. Limited data indicate that the incidence of mediastinitis can be reduced using closed incision negative-pressure wound therapy as a part of these strategies with the possibility of offering patients best treatment options by extending BIMA to those with a higher risk of mediastinitis. Recent economic data imply that the technology may challenge the current low uptake of BIMA by reducing the short-term cost differentials between single internal mammary artery and BIMA. Given that most published randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of observational long-term outcome data favor BIMA, if short-term complications of BIMA including mediastinitis can be controlled adequately, there may be opportunities for more extensive use of BIMA leading to improved long-term outcomes. An ongoing study looking at BIMA in high-risk patients may provide evidence to support the hypothesis that mediastinitis should not be a factor in limiting the use of BIMA in CABG.

Impact of Medicare's Bundled Payments Initiative on Patient Selection, Payments, and Outcomes for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

BACKGROUND: The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation launched the Bundled Payments for Care Initiative (BPCI) in 2013. Its effect on payments and outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used Medicare inpatient files to identify index admissions for PCI and CABG from 2013 through 2016 at BPCI hospitals and matched control hospitals and difference in differences models to compare the 2 groups. Our primary outcome was the change in standardized Medicare-allowed payments per 90-day episode. Secondary outcomes included changes in patient selection, discharge to postacute care, length of stay, emergency department use, readmissions, and mortality. Forty-two hospitals joined BPCI for PCI and 46 for CABG. There were no differential changes in patient selection between BPCI and control hospitals. Baseline Medicare payments per episode for PCI were $20 164 at BPCI hospitals and $19 955 at control hospitals. For PCI, payments increased at both BPCI and control hospitals during the intervention period, such that there was no significant difference in differences (BPCI hospitals +$673, P=0.048; control hospitals +$551, P=0.022; difference in differences $122, P=0.768). For CABG, payments at both BPCI and control hospitals decreased during the intervention period (BPCI baseline, $36 925, change -$2918, P<0.001; control baseline, $36 877, change -$2618, P<0.001; difference in differences, $300; P=0.730). For both PCI and CABG, BPCI participation was not associated with changes in mortality, readmissions, or length of stay. Among BPCI hospitals, emergency department use differentially increased for patients undergoing PCI and decreased for patients undergoing CABG. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in episode-based payment for PCI and CABG was not associated with changes in patient selection, payments, length of stay, or clinical outcomes.

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Cancer Patients: Prevalence and Outcomes in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the contemporary efficacy and utilization patterns of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in specific cancer types. METHODS: We leveraged the data from the National Inpatient Sample and plotted trends of utilization and outcomes of isolated CABG (with no other additional surgeries during the same hospitalization) procedures from January 1, 2003, through September 1, 2015. Propensity score matching was used to assess for potential differences in outcomes by type of cancer status among contemporary (2012-2015) patients. RESULTS: Overall, the utilization of CABG decreased over time (250,677 in 2003 vs 134,534 in 2015, P<.001). However, the proportion of those with comorbid cancer increased (7.0% vs 12.6%, P<.001). Over time, in-hospital mortality associated with CABG use in cancer remained unchanged (.9% vs 1.0%, P=.72); yet, cancer patients saw an increase in associated major bleeding (4.5% vs 15.3%, P<.001) and rate of stroke (.9% vs 1.5%, P<.001) over time. In-hospital cost-of-care associated with CABG-use in cancer also increased over time ($29,963 vs $33,636, P<.001). When stratified by cancer types, in-hospital mortality was not higher in breast, lung, prostate, colon cancer, or lymphoma versus non-cancer CABG patients (all P>.05). However, there was a significantly higher prevalence of major bleeding but not stroke in patients with breast and prostate cancer only compared with non-cancer CABG patients (P<.01). Discharge dispositions were not found to be different between cancer sub-groups and non-cancer patients (P>.05), except for breast cancer patients who had lower home care, but higher skilled care disposition (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Among those undergoing CABG, the prevalence of comorbid cancer has steadily increased. Outside of major bleeding, these patients appear to share similar outcomes to those without cancer indicating that CABG utilization should be not be declined in cancer patients when otherwise indicated. Further research into the factors underlying the decision to pursue CABG in specific cancer sub-groups is needed.

Hospital costs and prognosis in end-stage renal disease patients receiving coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is common in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Patients with ESRD are a high-risk group for cardiac surgery and have increased morbidity and mortality. Most studies comparing ESRD patients receiving coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention have found that the long-term survival is good in ESRD patients after CABG. The aim of our study was to compare ESRD patients who underwent CABG with the general population who underwent CABG, in terms of prognosis and hospital costs. METHODS: This study analyzed data from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan for patients who were diagnosed with ESRD and received CABG (ICD-9-CM codes 585 or 586) between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2009. The ESRD patients included in this study all received catastrophic illness cards with the major illness listed as ESRD from the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan. The control subjects were randomly selected patients without ESRD after propensity score matching with ESRD patients according to age, gender, and comorbidities at a 2:1 ratio from the same dataset. RESULTS: A total of 48 ESRD patients received CABG, and their mean age was 62.04 ± 10.04 years. Of these patients, 29.2% were aged ≥70 years, and 66.7% were male. ESRD patients had marginally higher intensive care unit (ICU) stays (11.06 vs 7.24 days) and significantly higher ICU costs (28,750 vs 17,990 New Taiwan Dollars (NTD)) than non-ESRD patients. Similarly, ESRD patients had significantly higher surgical costs (565,200 vs. 421,890 NTD), a higher perioperative mortality proportion (10.4% vs 2.1%) and a higher postoperative mortality proportion (33.3% vs 11.5%) than non-ESRD patients. CONCLUSIONS: After CABG, ESRD patients had a higher risk of mortality than non-ESRD patients, and ICU and surgery costs were also higher among the ESRD patients than among patients without ESRD.

Comparison of Anticoagulants for Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting oral anticoagulants are indicated for the treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, but their use in patients after undergoing cardiac surgery is poorly defined despite a high prevalence of postoperative atrial fibrillation in this population. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with postoperative atrial fibrillation were prospectively randomized to warfarin or apixaban. Safety, efficacy, and economic outcomes were evaluated until their 4- to 6-week postoperative appointment. RESULTS: While this pilot study was not powered to determine a difference in safety or efficacy, adverse event rates were similar to the published literature. It was noted that a patient's course of therapy when utilizing apixaban was significantly less costly than warfarin when including medication, bridging, and laboratory expenses. CONCLUSION: Apixaban and warfarin both appeared to be safe and effective for anticoagulation throughout the duration of this pilot study in treating postoperative atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass grafting. Apixaban was associated with significantly less expense when bridging and monitoring costs were included in addition to medication expense.

Preconditioning with levosimendan reduces postoperative low cardiac output in moderate-severe systolic dysfunction patients who will undergo elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a cost-effective strategy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with moderate-severe systolic dysfunction undergoing coronary artery bypass graft have a higher incidence of postoperative low cardiac output. Preconditioning with levosimendan may be a useful strategy to prevent this complication. In this context, design cost-effective strategies like preconditioning with levosimendan may become necessary. METHODS: In a sequential assignment of patients with Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction less than 40%, two strategies were compared in terms of cost-effectiveness: standard care (n = 41) versus preconditioning with Levosimendan (n = 13). The adverse effects studied included: postoperative new-onset atrial fibrillation, low cardiac output, renal failure and prolonged mechanical ventilation. The costs were evaluated using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and Monte Carlo simulations were performed. RESULTS: Preconditioning with levosimendan in moderate to severe systolic dysfunction (Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction < 40%), was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative low cardiac output in elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery 2(15.4%) vs 25(61%) (P < 0.01) and lesser intensive care unit length of stay 2(1-4) vs 4(3-6) days (P = 0.03). Average cost on levosimendan group was 14,792€ while the average cost per patient without levosimendan was 17,007€. Patients with no complications represented 53.8% of the total in the levosimendan arm, as compared to 31.7% in the non-levosimendan arm. In all Montecarlo simulations for sensitivity analysis, use of levosimendan was less expensive and more effective. CONCLUSIONS: Preconditioning with levosimendan, is a cost-effective strategy preventing postoperative low cardiac output in patients with moderate-severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Are cost advantages from a modern Indian hospital transferable to the United States?

BACKGROUND: Multiple modern Indian hospitals operate at very low cost while meeting US-equivalent quality accreditation standards. Though US hospitals face intensifying pressure to lower their cost, including proposals to extend Medicare payment rates to all admissions, the transferability of Indian hospitals' cost advantages to US peers remains unclear. METHODS: Using time-driven activity-based costing methods, we estimate the average cost of personnel and space for an elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery at two American hospitals and one Indian hospital (NH). All three hospitals are Joint Commission accredited and have reputations for use of modern performance management methods. Our case study applies several analytic steps to distinguish transferable from non-transferable sources of NH's cost savings. RESULTS: After removing non-transferable sources of efficiency, NH's residual cost advantage primarily rests on shifting tasks to less-credentialed and/or less-experienced personnel who are supervised by highly-skilled personnel when perceived risk of complications is low. NH's high annual CABG volume facilitates such supervised work "downshifting." The study is subject to limitations inherent in case studies, does not account for the younger age of NH's patients, or capture savings attributable to NH's negligible frequency of re-admission or post-acute care facility placement. CONCLUSIONS: Most transferable bases for a modern Indian hospital's cost advantage would require more flexible American states' hospital and health professional licensing regulations, greater family participation in inpatient care, and stronger support by hospital executives and clinicians for substantially lowering the cost of care via regionalization of complex surgeries and weekend use of costly operating rooms.

Cost-effectiveness of myocardial perfusion SPECT and stress test according to coronary revascularization therapy, cardiac events and total mortality: Register of 8,496 patients. / Coste-efectividad de la SPECT de perfusión miocárdica y de la prueba de esfuerzo en relación con la revascularización coronaria, eventos cardíacos y mortalidad total. Registro de 8.496 pacientes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to analyze the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) of stress electrocardiogram (ES) and stress myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) according to coronary revascularization (CR) therapy, cardiac events (CE) and total mortality (TM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 8,496 consecutive patients who underwent SPECT-MPI were followed-up (mean 5.3±3.5years). Cost-effectiveness for coronary bypass (CABG) or percutaneous CR (PCR) (45.6%/54.4%) according to combined electrocardiographic ischemia and scintigraphic ischemia were evaluated. Effectiveness was evaluated as TM, CE, life-year saved observed (LYSO) and CE-LYSO; costs analyses were conducted from the perspective of the health care payer. A sensitivity analysis was performed considering current CABG/PCR ratios (12%/88%). RESULTS: When electrocardiogram and SPECT approaches are combined, the cost-effectiveness values for CABG ranged between 112,589€ (electrocardiographic and scintigraphic ischemia) and 2,814,715€ (without ischemia)/event avoided, 38,664 and 2,221,559€/LYSO; for PCR ranged between 18,824€ (electrocardiographic and scintigraphic ischemia) and 46,377€ (without ischemia)/event avoided, 6,464 and 36,604€/LYSO. To CE: the cost-effectiveness values of the CABG and CPR in presence of electrocardiographic and scintigraphic ischemia were 269,904€/CE-avoided and 24,428€/CE-avoided, respectively; and the €/LYSO of the CABG and PCR were 152,488 and 13,801, respectively. The RCE was maintained for the current proportion of revascularized patients (12%/88%). CONCLUSIONS: Combined ES and SPECT-MPI results, allows differentiation between patient groups, where the PCR and CABG are more cost-effective in different economic frameworks. The major CER in relation to CR, CE and TM occurs in patients with electrocardiographic and scintigraphic ischemia. PCR is more cost-effective than CABG.

Federal Payments for Coronary Revascularization Procedures Among Dual Enrollees in Medicare Advantage and the Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

Importance: More than 1 million US veterans are dually enrolled in a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan and in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system. The federal government prepays private MA plans to cover veterans; if a dually enrolled veteran receives an MA-covered service at the VA, the government is making 2 payments for the same service. It is not clear what proportion of veterans dually enrolled in VA and MA are undergoing coronary revascularization at VA vs non-VA hospitals. Objective: To describe where veterans who are enrolled in both VA and MA undergo coronary revascularization and the associated costs. Design, Settings, and Participants: This is a cohort study consisting of US veterans dually enrolled in VA and MA from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2013, who had at least 1 VA encounter and underwent coronary revascularization during the study period. Data were analyzed from April 2019 to September 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) operations and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) performed through the VA and through MA during years 2010 to 2013, and the associated VA costs of coronary revascularization. In addition, multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess patient factors associated with receiving care through the VA. Results: A total of 18 874 VA users with concurrent MA enrollment who underwent coronary revascularization during 2010 to 2013 were identified (mean [SD] age, 75.3 [8.8] years; 18 739 men [99.0%]). Enrollees were predominantly white (17 457 patients [92.0%]). Among patients, 4115 (22.0%) underwent either CABG or PCI through the VA only, 14 281 (75.0%) did so through MA only, and 478 (2.5%) underwent coronary revascularization procedures through both payers. From 2010 to 2013, these veterans underwent 4764 coronary revascularization procedures (721 CABGs and 3043 PCIs) that cost the VA $214.7 million ($115.8 million for CABGs and $99.0 million for PCIs). In multivariable analysis, nonwhite patients were more likely than white patients to undergo coronary revascularization through the VA (odds ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.52-1.96; P < .001), and for each year of age, veterans were less likely to undergo coronary revascularization through the VA (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94-0.95; P < .001). There was no statistically significant association between undergoing coronary vascularization through the VA and distance in miles to the nearest VA hospital (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99-1.00; P = .30). Conclusions and Relevance: A substantial share of VA users concurrently enrolled in an MA plan underwent coronary revascularization procedures through the VA, incurring significant duplicative federal health care spending. Given the financial pressures facing both Medicare and the VA, government officials should consider policy solutions to mitigate redundant spending.

Economic Analysis of Surgical and Interventional Treatments for Patients with Complex Coronary Artery Disease: Insights from a One-Year Single-Center Study.

BACKGROUND Surgical treatment methods for patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) who have undergone vascular reconstruction mainly include coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The purpose of the study aimed to compare a 1-year follow-up for the patient clinical outcomes and costs between PCI and CABG treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS There were 840 patients enrolled in this study from July 2015 to September 2016. Among the study participants, 420 patients underwent PCI treatment and 420 patients underwent off-pump CABG. Patients costs were assessed from the perspective of the China healthcare and medical insurance system. EuroQOL 5-dimension 3 levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire was used to evaluate the general health status, and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) was used to assess the disease-specific health status. RESULTS After a 1-year follow-up, the all-cause mortality (P=0.0337), the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (P<0.001), and additional revascularization (P<0.001) in PCI group were significantly higher than those in CABG group. Both groups have significant sustained benefits in the SAQ subscale. The CABG group had a higher score on the frequency of angina than the PCI group. In addition, the quality-adjusted life year value of PCI and CABG resulted was 0.8. The average total cost for PCI was $14 643 versus CABG cost of $13 842 (P=0.0492). CONCLUSIONS In the short-term, among the CAD patients with stable triple-vessel or left-main, costs and clinical outcomes are substantially higher for CABG than PCI. Long-term, economic, and health benefits analysis, is warranted.

Endoscopic Radial Artery Harvesting During Anesthesia Line Placement Reduces the Time and Cost of Multivessel Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic radial artery (RA) harvesting performed concurrently with internal mammary artery (IMA) takedown and endoscopic saphenous vein (SV) harvesting creates a crowded and inefficient operating room environment. We assessed the effect of a presternotomy RA harvest strategy on surgery time and costs. METHODS: A total of 41 patients underwent elective, first-time, isolated multivessel on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting including an IMA, RA, and SV graft. The first 20 patients (Phase I) underwent endoscopic RA harvesting concurrently with IMA takedown and endoscopic SV harvesting after sternotomy, requiring two sets of endoscopic harvesting equipment per case, each used by a separate individual. The final 21 patients (Phase II) underwent endoscopic RA harvesting during anesthesia line placement, completing the procedure before sternotomy, thus requiring only one set of endoscopic harvesting equipment reused by a single individual. RESULTS: There were no differences in baseline patient characteristics, number of bypasses, duration of SV or RA harvest time, or duration of cardiopulmonary bypass or cross-clamp time between the two groups. Total surgery time was reduced by 32 minutes in Phase II (P = 0.044). Relative to a total hospital direct cost of 100.00 units, total surgery costs were reduced from 29.33 units in Phase I to 25.62 units in Phase II (P = 0.001). No anesthesia- or RA harvest-related complications occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic RA harvesting can be safely performed during anesthesia line placement prior to sternotomy. Our simple but innovative strategy improves intraoperative workflow, reduces the time and cost of surgery, and advances the delivery of high-quality patient care.

Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation concomitant to coronary-artery bypass grafting provides cost-effective mortality reduction.

BACKGROUND: Data on the longitudinal impact of surgical ablation (SA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remain limited. This study examined 2-year risk-adjusted mortality and total hospital costs in Medicare beneficiaries with AF requiring CABG with or without SA. METHODS: CABG was performed in 3745 Medicare beneficiaries with AF in 2013, with concomitant SA in 17% (626 of 3745). Risk-adjusted mortality, morbidity, and cost during the first 2 postoperative years for patients with SA and those without SA were compared. A piecewise Cox proportional hazard model (0-90 days and 91-729 days) was used to risk-adjust mortality. RESULTS: Compared with the no SA group, the SA group had lower rates of heart failure before surgery (31% vs 36%), chronic lung disease (27% vs 33%), renal failure (4% vs 7%), and urgent or emergent presentation (34% vs 49%) (all P < .05). Risk-adjusted index admission costs were higher with SA (rate ratio [RR], 1.11; P < .01), as were readmissions for AF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.29; P = .04) and pacemaker/defibrillator implantation (HR, 1.37; 95%, 1.08-1.74; P = .01). Risk-adjusted inpatient days and inpatient costs were similar after 2 years (RR, 0.97; P = .31 and RR = 1.04; P = .17, respectively); however, the risk-adjusted hazard for late mortality (91-729 days) was significantly lower with SA (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.97; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF requiring CABG, SA was associated with a 29% lower risk-adjusted hazard for late mortality. Index hospital costs were higher with SA, but total inpatient costs were not different in the 2 groups after 2 years. SA appears to be a cost-effective intervention to enhance late 2-year survival in patients with AF undergoing CABG.