Three-dimensional-guided and ICE-guided transseptal puncture for cardiac ablations: A propensity score match study.

INTRODUCTION: Transseptal puncture (TSP) is routinely performed for left atrial ablation procedures. The use of a three-dimensional (3D) mapping system or intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is useful in localizing the fossa ovalis and reducing fluoroscopy use. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy between 3D mapping system-guided TSP and ICE-guided TSP techniques. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of patients undergoing TSP for left atrial catheter ablation procedures (mostly atrial fibrillation ablation). Propensity scoring was used to match patients undergoing 3D-guided TSP with patients undergoing ICE-guided TSP. Logistic regression was used to compare the clinical data, procedural data, fluoroscopy time, success rate, and complications between the groups. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients underwent 3D-guided TSP, and 151 propensity score-matched patients underwent ICE-guided TSP. The TSP success rate was 100% in both the 3D-guided and ICE-guided groups. Median needle time was 4.00 min (interquartile range [IQR]: 2.57-5.08) in patients with 3D-guided TSP compared to 4.02 min (IQR: 2.83-6.95) in those with ICE-guided TSP (p = .22). Mean fluoroscopy time was 0.2 min (IQR: 0.1-0.4) in patients with 3D-guided TSP compared to 1.2 min (IQR: 0.7-2.2) in those with ICE-guided TSP (p < .001). There were no complications related to TSP in both group. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional mapping-guided TSP is as safe and effective as ICE-guided TSP without additional cost.

Factors Affecting Visits to the Emergency Department for Urgent and Nonurgent Ocular Conditions.

PURPOSE: To determine the frequency of emergency department (ED) visits for nonurgent and urgent ocular conditions and risk factors associated with ED use for nonurgent and urgent ocular problems. DESIGN: Retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis. PARTICIPANTS: All enrollees aged 21 years or older in a United States managed care network during 2001-2014. METHODS: We identified all enrollees visiting an ED for ocular conditions identified by International Classification of Diseases, billing codes. Diagnosis is well-described as urgent, nonurgent, or other. We assessed the frequency of ED visits for urgent and nonurgent ocular conditions and how they changed over time. Next, we performed multivariable Cox regression modeling to determine factors associated with visiting an ED for urgent or nonurgent ocular conditions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of visiting an ED for urgent or nonurgent ocular conditions. RESULTS: Of the 11 160 833 enrollees eligible for this study, 376 680 (3.4%) had 1 or more ED visit for an eye-related problem over a mean ± standard deviation of 5.4±3.3 years' follow-up. Among these enrolled, 86 473 (23.0%) had 1 or more ED visits with a nonurgent ocular condition and 25 289 (6.7%) had at least 1 ED visit with an urgent ocular condition. Use of the ED for nonurgent ocular problems was associated with younger age (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), black race or Latino ethnicity (P < 0.0001 for both), male sex (P < 0.0001), lower income (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), and those who frequently sought treatment at an ED for nonophthalmologic medical problems in a given year (P < 0.0001). Enrollees with established eye care professionals had a 10% reduced hazard of visiting the ED for nonurgent ocular conditions (adjusted HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.88-0.92; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-quarter of enrollees who visited the ED for an ocular problem received a diagnosis of a nonurgent condition. Better educating and incentivizing patients to seek care for nonurgent ocular diseases in an office-based setting could yield considerable cost savings without adversely affecting health outcomes and could allow EDs to better serve patients with more severe conditions.

A statewide, community-based assessment of alvimopan's effect on surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Alvimopan was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in May 2008 and has been shown to accelerate gastrointestinal recovery after colectomy. Our independent study evaluated alvimopan as it is used in actual hospital practice in the state of Michigan. We hypothesized that alvimopan significantly decreases incidence of prolonged ileus and reduces length of stay (LOS) in patients who have undergone colectomy. METHODS: We identified 4749 patients from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (N = 28 hospitals) database between August 2007 and December 2010 who underwent elective colectomy operations. A total of 528 patients received alvimopan both pre- and postoperatively. We first selected a control group of patients from hospitals that had never administered alvimopan (n = 1833) and used propensity matching to manage differences in patient demographics and clinical characteristics. To control for hospital and surgeon characteristics, we then performed a sensitivity analysis, using a separate group of historical control patients treated before May 2008 in hospitals that would later administer alvimopan (n = 270). The Fisher exact test was used to compare complication rates, and the Student t test was used to compare LOS. RESULTS: Patients who received alvimopan had significantly lower incidence of prolonged ileus (2.3% vs 7.9%; P < 0.001) and a significantly shorter LOS (4.84 ± 4.54 vs 6.40 ± 4.45 days; P < 0.001) than control patients in hospitals that had never administered alvimopan. No differences were noted in these outcomes using sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the actual utilization of alvimopan leads to a reduction in prolonged ileus and LOS in patients who underwent colectomy. By accelerating postoperative recovery, alvimopan has the potential to benefit patients and health care systems by improving outcomes, ensuring patient comfort, and reducing cost.