Comparison of economic and patient outcomes with minimally invasive versus traditional off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting techniques.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (miniCABG) decreases in-hospital morbidity versus traditional sternotomy CABG. We performed a prospective cohort study (NCT00481806) to assess the impact of miniCABG on costs and metrics that influence quality of life after hospital discharge. METHODS: One hundred consecutive miniCABG cases performed using internal mammary artery (IMA) grafting +/- coronary stenting were compared with a matched group of 100 sternotomy CABG patients using IMA and saphenous veins, both treating equivalent number of target coronaries (2.7 vs. 2.9), off-pump. We compared perioperative costs, time to return to work/normal activity, and risk of major adverse cardiac/cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 1 year: myocardial infarction (elevated troponin or EKG changes), target vessel occlusion (CT angiography at 1 year), stroke, or death. RESULTS: For miniCABG, robotic instruments and stents increased intraoperative costs; postoperative costs were decreased from significantly less intubation time (4.80 +/- 6.35 vs. 12.24 +/- 6.24 hours), hospital stay (3.77 +/- 1.51 vs. 6.38 +/- 2.23 days), and transfusion (0.16 +/- 0.37 vs. 1.37 +/- 1.35 U) leading to no significant differences in total costs. Undergoing miniCABG independently predicted earlier return to work after adjusting for confounders (t = -2.15; P = 0.04), whereas sternotomy CABG increased MACCE (HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.4-7.6), largely from lower target-vessel patency. CONCLUSIONS: MiniCABG shortens patient recovery time, minimizes MACCE risk at 1 year, and showed superior quality and outcome metrics versus standard-of-care CABG. These findings occurred without increasing costs and with superior target vessel graft patency.

Respiratory therapy organizational changes are associated with increased respiratory care utilization.

BACKGROUND: The effect of the respiratory therapist (RT)/patient ratio and RT organizational factors on respiratory resource utilization is unknown. We describe the impact of a multi-component intervention that called for an increase in RT/patient ratio (1:14 to 1:10), improved RT orientation, and formation of a core staffing model on best practice, including spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) and catheter and bronchoscopically directed lower respiratory tract cultures, or bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), in both ventilated and non-ventilated patients in the ICU. METHODS: We conducted a single center, quasi-experimental study comparing 651 patients with single and first admissions between April 19, 2005 and April 18, 2006 before the RT services reorganization with 1,073 patients with single and first admissions between September 16, 2007 and September 4, 2008. Baseline characteristics were compared, along with SBTs, BAL use, lower respiratory tract cultures, and chest physiotherapy. RESULTS: Patients in the 2 groups were similar in terms of age (52.9 ± 15.8 y vs 53.9 ± 16.4 y, P = .23), comorbidity as measured by Charlson score (2.8 ± 2.6 vs 2.8 ± 2.7, P = .56), and acuity of illness as measured by the Case Mix Index (3.2 ± 3.9 vs 3.3 ± 4.1, P = .47). Mechanically ventilated patients had similar prevalences of respiratory diseases (24.2% vs 25.1%, P = .61). There was an increase in SBTs (0.5% vs 73.1%, P < .001), chest physiotherapy (7.4% vs 21.6%, P < .001), BALs (24.0% vs 41.4%, P < .001), and lower respiratory tract cultures (21.5% vs 38.0%, P < .001) in mechanically ventilated patients post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A multi-component intervention, including an increase in RT/patient ratio, improved RT orientation, and establishment of a core staffing model, was associated with increased respiratory resource utilization and evidence-based practice, specifically BALs and SBTs.