Trends in High- and Low-Value Cardiovascular Diagnostic Testing in Fee-for-Service Medicare, 2000-2016.

Importance: Owing to a rapid increase in rates of diagnostic cardiovascular testing in the 1990s and early 2000s, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented a series of payment changes intended to reduce overall spending on fee-for-service testing. Whether guideline-concordant testing has been subsequently affected is unknown to date. Objective: To determine whether changes in overall rates of use of diagnostic cardiovascular tests were associated with changes in high-value testing recommended by guidelines and low-value testing that is expected to provide minimal benefits. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study assessed a national 5% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 to 95 years from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2016. Data were analyzed from February 15, 2018, through August 15, 2019. Exposures: Eligibility to receive high-value testing (assessment of left ventricular systolic function among patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or heart failure) and low-value testing (stress testing before low-risk noncardiac surgery and routine stress testing within 2 years of coronary revascularization not associated with acute care visits). Main Outcomes and Measures: Age- and sex-adjusted annual rates of overall, high-value, and low-value diagnostic cardiovascular testing. Results: Mean (SD) age was similar over time (75.57 [7.32] years in 2000-2003; 74.82 [7.79] years in 2012-2016); the proportion of women slightly declined over time (63.23% in 2000 to 2003; 57.27% in 2012 to 2016). The rate of overall diagnostic cardiovascular testing per 1000 patient-years among the 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries increased from 275 in 2000 to 359 in 2008 (P < .001) and then declined to 316 in 2016 (P < .001). High-value testing increased steadily over the entire study period for patients with acute myocardial infarction (85.7% to 89.5%; P < .001) and heart failure (72.6% to 80.1%; P < .001). Low-value testing among patients undergoing low-risk surgery increased from 2.4% in 2000 to 3.8% in 2008 (P < .001) but then declined to 2.5% in 2016 (P < .001). Low-value testing within 2 years of coronary revascularization slightly increased from 47.4% in 2000 to 49.2% in 2003 (P = .03) but then declined to 30.8% in 2014 (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Rates of overall and low-value diagnostic cardiovascular testing appear to have declined considerably and rates of high-value testing have increased slightly. Payment changes intended to reduce spending on overall testing may not have adversely affected testing recommended by guidelines.

Technological advances shed light on left ventricular cardiac disturbances in cystic fibrosis.

Cystic fibrosis (CF), the most common autosomal recessive lethal disease in Caucasians, causes chronic pulmonary disease and can lead to cor pulmonale with right ventricular dysfunction. The presence of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) in cardiac myocardia has prompted debate regarding possible defective ion channel-induced cardiomyopathy. Clinical heart disease in CF is considered rare and is restricted to case reports. It has been unclear if this is due to the lack of physiological importance of CFTR in the heart, the relatively short lifespan of those with CF, or a technical inability to detect subclinical disease. Extensive echocardiographic investigations have yielded contradictory results, leading to the dogma that left ventricular defects in CF occur secondary to lung disease. In this review, we consider why studies examining heart function in CF have not provided clarity on this topic. We then focus on data from new echocardiographic and magnetic resonance imaging technology, which are providing greater insight into cardiac function in CF and demonstrating that, in addition to secondary effects from pulmonary disease, there may be an intrinsic primary defect in the CF heart. With advancing lifespans and activity levels, understanding the risk of cardiac disease is vital to minimizing morbidity in adults with CF.

Left ventricular function assessment in cirrhosis: Current methods and future directions.

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy has been defined as a chronic cardiac dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis characterized by impaired contractile responsiveness to stress and/or altered diastolic relaxation with electrophysiological abnormalities in the absence of other known cardiac disease. Non-invasive cardiovascular imaging modalities play a major role in unmasking systolic and diastolic dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis. Echocardiography has been the most commonly used modality for assessing myocardial function in these patients. Conventional echocardiographic indices rely on several assumptions that may limit their applicability in patients with a hyperdynamic circulation. Newer imaging modalities may contribute to a more accurate diagnosis of cardiovascular abnormalities in cirrhotic patients, thereby influencing clinical management. We aimed to review the different non-invasive imaging technologies currently used for assessing left ventricular systolic and diastolic function in cirrhosis, as well as to describe new imaging modalities with potential clinical applicability in the near future.

Methods used for the assessment of LV systolic function: common currency or tower of Babel?

The last decade has produced a proliferation of techniques for the assessment of left ventricular systolic function, and there now seems to be more choice than seems rational for the questions that we need answers to. In some instances, simple estimation is all that is required-the risk stratification process is inexact, as emphasised by the variety of modalities used to characterise ejection fraction (EF) in studies that validated the efficacy of treatments selected on the basis of EF. Nonetheless, while technical advances often cause disruption and confusion, it would be wrong to dismiss them as lacking benefit. The purpose of this review is to try to provide rational grounds for selecting both test modality and physiological parameter in various specific clinical situations.

Patterns and predictors of stress testing modality after percutaneous coronary stenting: data from the NCDR(®).

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated temporal trends and geographic variation in choice of stress testing modality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), as well as associations between modality and procedure use after testing. BACKGROUND: Stress testing is frequently performed post-PCI, but the choices among available modalities (electrocardiography only, nuclear, or echocardiography; pharmacological or exercise stress) and consequences of such choices are not well characterized. METHODS: CathPCI Registry(®) data were linked with identifiable Medicare claims to capture stress testing use between 60 and 365 days post-PCI and procedures within 90 days after testing. Testing rates and modality used were modeled on the basis of patient, procedure, and PCI facility factors, calendar quarter, and Census Divisions using Poisson and logistic regression. Post-test procedure use was assessed using Gray's test. RESULTS: Among 284,971 patients, the overall stress testing rate after PCI was 53.1 per 100 person-years. Testing rates declined from 59.3 in quarter 1 (2006) to 47.1 in quarter 4 (2008), but the relative use of modalities changed little. Among exercise testing recipients, adjusted proportions receiving electrocardiography-only testing varied from 6.8% to 22.8% across Census Divisions; and among exercise testing recipients having an imaging test, the proportion receiving echocardiography (versus nuclear) varied from 9.4% to 34.1%. Post-test procedure use varied among modalities; exercise electrocardiography-only testing was associated with more subsequent stress testing (13.7% vs. 2.9%; p < 0.001), but less catheterization (7.4% vs. 14.1%; p < 0.001) than imaging-based tests. CONCLUSIONS: Modest reductions in stress testing after PCI occurring between 2006 and 2008 cannot be ascribed to trends in use of any single modality. Additional research should assess whether this trend represents better patient selection for testing or administrative policies (e.g., restricted access for patients with legitimate testing needs). Geographic variation in utilization of stress modalities and differences in downstream procedure use among modalities suggest a need to identify optimal use of the different test modalities in individual patients.