Economic value of podiatry service in limb salvage alliance.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, multidisciplinary "toe and flow" programs have gained great popularity, with proven benefits in limb salvage. Many vascular surgeons have incorporated podiatrists into their practices. The viability of this practice model requires close partnership, hospital support, and financial sustainability. We intend to examine the economic values of podiatrists in a busy safety-net hospital in the Southwest United States. METHODS: An administrative database that captured monthly operating room (OR) cases, clinic encounters, in-patient volume, and total work relative value units (wRVUs) in an established limb salvage program in a tertiary referral center were examined. The practice has a diverse patient population with >30% of minority patients. During a period of 3 years, there was a significant change in the number of podiatrists (from 1 to 4) within the program, whereas the clinical full-time employees for vascular surgeons remained relatively stable. RESULTS: The limb salvage program experienced >100% of growth in total OR volumes, clinic encounters, and total wRVUs over a period of 4 years. A total of 35,591 patients were evaluated in a multidisciplinary limb salvage clinic, and 5535 procedures were performed. The initial growth of clinic volume and operative volume (P < .01) were attributed by the addition of vascular surgeons in year one. However, recruitment of podiatrists to the program significantly increased clinic and OR volume by an additional 60% and >40%, respectively (P < .01) in the past 3 years. With equal number of surgeons, podiatry contributed 40% of total wRVUs generated by the entire program in 2019. Despite the fact that that most of the foot and ankle procedures that were regularly performed by vascular surgeons were shifted to the podiatrists, vascular surgeons continued to experience an incremental increase in operative volume and >10% of increase in wRVUs. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the value of close collaboration between podiatry and vascular in a limb salvage program extends beyond a patient's clinical outcome. A financial advantage of including podiatrists in a vascular surgery practice is clearly demonstrated.

Procedural and 12-month in-hospital costs of primary infra-popliteal bypass surgery, infrapopliteal best endovascular treatment, and major lower limb amputation for chronic limb threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is a growing global problem due to the widespread use of tobacco and increasing prevalence of diabetes. Although the financial consequences are considerable, few studies have compared the relative cost-effectiveness of different CLTI management strategies. The Bypass vs Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL)-2 trial is randomizing patients with CLTI to primary infrapopliteal (IP) vein bypass surgery (BS) or best endovascular treatment (BET) and includes a comprehensive within-trial cost-utility analysis. The aim of this study is to compare over a 12-month time horizon, the costs of primary IP BS, IP best endovascular treatment (BET), and major limb major amputation (MLLA) to inform the BASIL-2 cost-utility analysis. METHODS: We compared procedural human resource (HR) costs and total in-hospital costs for the index admission, and over the following 12-months, in 60 consecutive patients undergoing primary IP BS (n = 20), IP BET (n = 20), or MLLA (10 transfemoral and 10 transtibial) for CLTI within the BASIL prospective cohort study. RESULTS: Procedural HR costs were greatest for BS (BS £2551; 95% confidence interval [CI], £1934-£2807 vs MLLA £1130; 95% CI, £1046-£1297 vs BET £329; 95% CI, £242-£390; P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis) due to longer procedure duration and greater staff requirement. With regard to the index admission, MLLA was the most expensive due to longer hospital stay (MLLA £13,320; 95% CI, £8986-£18,616 vs BS £8714; 95% CI, £6097-£11,973 vs BET £4813; 95% CI, £3529-£6097; P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis). The total cost of the index admission and in-hospital care over the following 12 months remained least for BET (MLLA £26,327; 95% CI, £17,653-£30,458 vs BS £20,401; 95% CI, £12,071-£23,926 vs BET £12,298; 95% CI, £6961-£15,439; P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis). CONCLUSIONS: Over a 12-month time horizon, MLLA and IP BS are more expensive than IP BET in terms of procedural HR costs and total in-hospital costs. These economic data, together with quality of life data from BASIL-2, will inform the calculation of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for different CLTI management strategies within the BASIL-2 cost-utility analysis.

Socioeconomic factors associated with limb salvage versus amputation for adult extremity bone sarcomas in patients with insurance coverage.

BACKGROUND: Limb salvage (LS) has become the preferred treatment for adult patients with bone sarcoma of the extremities. The decision to perform LS versus an amputation is often dictated by tumor characteristics, however there may be socioeconomic factors associated with LS. Previously this has been linked to insurance status, however currently there is a paucity of data examining socioeconomic factors in patients with medical insurance at the time of sarcoma diagnosis. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to examine socioeconomic factors which could be associated with the decision to perform LS versus amputation for adult bone sarcoma patients. METHODS: Data from Optum Labs Data Warehouse, a national administrative claims database, was analyzed to identify patients with extremity bone sarcomas from 2006 to 2017. Bivariate regression was used to identify factors associated with LS versus amputation. RESULTS: Of 1,390 (743 males, 647 female) patients, 252 (18%) under amputation while 1,138 (82%) underwent LS. Lower extremity tumors (OR 4.72, p < 0.001), income <$75,000 (OR 1.85, p = 0.03), being treated a public hospital (OR 1.41, p = 0.04) and a hospital with <200 beds (OR 1.90, p = 0.006) were associated with amputation. Income ≥$125,000 (OR 0.62, 0.04) were associated with LS. CONCLUSION: In adult patients with medical insurance at the time of diagnosis, socioeconomic and hospital factors were associated with an amputation for bone sarcoma, with poorer patients, and those treated at smaller, and public hospitals more likely to undergo amputation.

Characteristics of high-cost inpatients with peripheral artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: Inpatient treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) is more than six times as costly as that of the general inpatient population. Our objective was to describe factors associated with hospital cost for patients admitted for PAD, the characteristics of high-cost patients, and their outcomes including amputations and death. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of admitted patients receiving a procedure for PAD at The Ottawa Hospital between 2007 and 2016. Demographics, comorbidity, inpatient events, and hospital cost data during the index admission were collected. We defined high-cost patients as those whose total costs of index admission were in the tenth percentile and above. Features associated with high-cost status were examined using logistic regression with elastic net regularization. We used generalized linear models to examine overall drivers of cost. RESULTS: We identified 3084 eligible patients, incurring $72.2 million in hospital costs. The mean cost of the most expensive 10% of patients was $88,076 (standard deviation, $54,720), more than five times the mean cost of $16,217 (standard deviation, $10,322) for nonhigh-cost patients. High-cost patients were more likely to present urgently (odds ratio [OR], 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-2.25; P < .01). After adjustment for preadmission factors, high-cost patients were more likely to have experienced an adverse patient safety incident (OR, 13.49; 95% CI, 6.97-24.8; P < .01), amputation (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.68-4.49; P <.01), intensive care unit admission (OR, 6.42; 95% CI, 3.62-10.2; P < .01), and disposition barriers requiring alternate level of care status (OR, 10.44; 95% CI, 6.42-15.2; P < .01). The high-cost group was more likely to have received hybrid revascularization (OR, 7.07; 95% CI, 3.34-13.6; P < .01). High-cost patients had higher than predicted in-hospital mortality (18% vs 9.2% predicted) compared with the low-cost group (3.0% vs 2.7%; P < .001), and fewer than half of high-cost patients were discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: Providing hospital care for the top 10% most expensive patients in our cohort was more than five times as costly per patient than providing care for the nonhigh-cost patients. Whereas pre-existing factors may predispose a patient to require expensive care, there are potentially modifiable factors during the admission that could reduce costs of these patients.

Temporal trends and hospital costs associated with an endovascular-first approach for acute limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Recent studies suggest similar perioperative outcomes for endovascular and open surgical management of acute limb ischemia (ALI). We sought to describe temporal trends, patient factors, and hospital costs associated with contemporary ALI management. METHODS: We used the weighted National Inpatient Sample to estimate primary ALI cases requiring open or endovascular intervention (2005-2014). We used multivariable regression models to examine temporal trends, patient factors, and hospital costs associated with endovascular-first vs open-first management. RESULTS: Of 116,451 admissions for ALI during the study period, 35.2% were treated by an endovascular-first approach. The percentage of admissions managed with an endovascular-first approach increased over time (P < .001). Independent predictors of endovascular-first management included younger age, male sex, renal insufficiency, and more recent calendar year of admission (P ≤ .02), whereas patients who underwent fasciotomy, those with Medicaid, and those admitted on a weekend were more likely to undergo open-first management (P ≤ .02). Endovascular-first management had higher mean hospital costs than open-first management ($29,719 vs $26,193; P < .001). After adjustment for patient, hospital, and admission characteristics, there was an increase of $981 in treatment costs per year in the endovascular-first group (95% confidence interval [CI], $571-$1392; P < .001), whereas the costs associated with an open-first approach remained relatively stable over time ($10 per year; 95% CI, -$295 to $315; P = .95; P < .001 for interaction). The risk-adjusted odds of in-hospital major amputation was similar in both groups (adjusted odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.15; P = .88). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an endovascular-first approach for the treatment of ALI has significantly increased over time. Although major amputation rates are similar for both approaches, the costs associated with an endovascular-first approach are increasing over time, whereas the costs of open surgery have remained stable. The cost-effectiveness of modern ALI management warrants further investigation.

Contribution of 30-day readmissions to the increasing costs of care for the diabetic foot.

OBJECTIVE: The inpatient cost of care for diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) has been estimated to be $1.4 billion annually in the United States. We have previously demonstrated that the risk of 30-day unplanned readmission for patients with DFU is nearly 22%. Our aim was to quantify the cost of readmissions for patients admitted with DFU. METHODS: All patients presenting to our multidisciplinary diabetic limb preservation service from June 2012 to June 2016 were enrolled in a prospective database. Inpatient costs and net margins were calculated overall and for index admissions vs 30-day unplanned readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 249 admissions for 150 patients were included. Of these, 206 admissions were index admissions and 43 were 30-day readmissions. The most common reason for readmission was the foot wound (49%), followed by a bypass wound (14%), renal complications (9%), and other systemic complications. Surgical interventions during readmission were common (47%) and included both podiatric (37%) and vascular (23%). The wound healing outcomes were favorable, with 78% of all wounds achieving healing by 1 year. Limb salvage was 91% overall. The median hospital cost per admission was $20,111 (interquartile range, $12,589-$33,254) and did not differ between the index and readmissions ($22,165 vs $19,408; P = .46). However, the hospital net margins were lower after readmission ($3908 vs $1975; P = .02). The overall cost of care for patients requiring readmission was significantly greater than that for patients not readmitted ($79,315 vs $28,977; P < .001). During the study period, DFU care at our institution cost $7.9 million, of which $1.2 million (16%) was attributable to readmission costs. CONCLUSIONS: Readmissions for patients with DFU are common and associated with a substantial cost burden. The cost of readmission for patients with DFU was as high as the cost of the index admission but with lower hospital net margins. When extrapolated to national data, the 15% readmission cost burden we have reported would be equivalent to $210 million hospital costs annually. Focused efforts at preventing readmissions in this high-risk patient population are essential to reducing the overall costs of care associated with DFUs.

Multidisciplinary clinics reduce treatment costs and improve patient outcomes in diabetic foot disease.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetic foot disease poses a significant and rising financial burden on health care systems worldwide. This study investigated the effect of a new multidisciplinary diabetic foot clinic (MDDFC) in a large tertiary hospital on patient outcomes and treatment cost. METHODS: Patients' records were retrospectively reviewed to identify all patients who had been managed in a new MDDFC between July 2014 and July 2017. The wound episode-the period from initial presentation to the achievement of a final wound outcome-was identified, and all relevant inpatient and outpatient costs were extracted using a fully absorbed activity-based costing methodology. Risk factor, treatment, outcome, and costing data for this cohort were compared with a group of patients with diabetic foot wounds who had been managed in the same hospital before the advent of the MDDFC using a generalized linear mixed model. RESULTS: The MDDFC and pre-MDDFC cohorts included 73 patients with 80 wound episodes and 225 patients with 265 wound episodes, respectively. Compared with the pre-MDDFC cohort, the MDDFC group had fewer inpatient admissions (1.56 vs 2.64; P ≤ .001). MDDFC patients had a lower major amputation rate (3.8% vs 27.5%; P ≤ .001), a lower mortality rate (7.5% vs 19.2%; P ≤ .05), and a higher rate of minor amputation (53.8% vs 31.7%; P ≤ .01). No statistically significant difference was noted in the rate of excisional débridement, skin graft, and open or endovascular revascularization. In the MDDFC cohort, the median total cost, inpatient cost, and outpatient cost per wound episode was New Zealand dollars (NZD) 22,407.465 (U.S. dollars [USD] 17,253.74), NZD 21,638.93 (USD 16,661.97), and NZD 691.915 (USD 532.77), respectively. The MDDFC to pre-MDDFC wound episode total cost ratio was 0.7586 (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to compare the cost and treatment outcomes of diabetic foot patients treated in a large tertiary hospital before and after the introduction of an MDDFC. The results show that an MDDFC improves patient outcomes and reduces the cost of treatment. MDDFCs should be adopted as the standard of care for diabetic foot patients.

Low cost reconstructive options after musculoskeletal tumour resection in developing countries. Affordable, effective and durable alternatives.

Over the last two, three decades, the overall survival rates for non-metastatic malignant tumours of the bone have dramatically improved. This has become possible due to the recent advances and multidisciplinary approach towards these diseases, specifically the advent of multi-agent chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Limb salvage has now become the norm in the treatment of musculoskeletal tumours without compromising on the overall survival and recurrence of the disease. In the era of metal, prosthetic reconstruction has become the standard procedure specifically in the large tumours which involve the joints as this method of reconstruction helps in joint mobility and early weight-bearing. Considering the costs and resource constraints, multiple cost-effective, stable, durable reconstruction options have evolved over the last decade and these have also shown favourable func tional outcomes without compromising on the amount of resection and risk of local recurrence. The current literature review was planned to discuss various cost-effective, durable reconstructive options and their advantages and disadvantages. These include Van ness rotationplasty, allograft, autograft, devitalised tumour bone and Masqueletor induced membrane technique . .

Quantifying the costs and profitability of care for diabetic foot ulcers treated in a multidisciplinary setting.

OBJECTIVE: Increasing Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) stage has previously been shown to be associated with prolonged wound healing time, higher number of surgical procedures, and increased cost of care in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) treated in a multidisciplinary setting. However, the profitability of this care model is unknown. We aimed to quantify the hospital costs and net margins associated with multidisciplinary DFU care. METHODS: All patients presenting to our multidisciplinary diabetic limb preservation service (January 2012-June 2016) were enrolled in a prospective database. Inpatient and outpatient costs and net margin (U.S. dollars) were calculated for each wound episode (initial visit until complete wound healing) overall and per day of care according to WIfI classification. RESULTS: A total of 319 wound episodes in 248 patients were captured. Patients required an average of 2.6 ± 0.2 inpatient admissions and 0.9 ± 0.1 outpatient procedures to achieve complete healing. Limb salvage at 1 year was 95.0% ± 2.4%. The overall mean cost of care per wound episode was $24,226 ± $2176, including $41,420 ± $3318 for inpatient admissions and $11,265 ± $1038 for outpatient procedures. The mean net margin was $2412 ± $375 per wound episode, including $5128 ± $622 for inpatient admissions and a net loss ($-3730 ± $596) for outpatient procedures. Mean time to wound healing was 136.3 ± 7.9 days, ranging from 106.5 ± 13.1 days for WIfI stage 1 wounds to 229.5 ± 20.0 days for WIfI stage 4 wounds (P < .001). When adjusted for days of care, the net margin ranged from $2.6 ± $1.3 per day (WIfI stage 1) to $23.6 ± $18.8 (WIfI stage 4). CONCLUSIONS: The costs associated with multidisciplinary DFU care are substantial, especially with advanced-stage wounds. Whereas hospitals can operate at a profit overall, the net margins associated with outpatient procedures performed in a hospital-based facility are prohibitive, and the overall net margins are relatively low, given the labor required to achieve good outcomes. Thus, reimbursement for the multidisciplinary care of DFUs should be re-examined.

Cost Analysis of Initial Treatment With Endovascular Revascularization, Open Surgery, or Primary Major Amputation in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease.

PURPOSE: To compare the total initial treatment costs for open surgery, endovascular revascularization, and primary major amputation within a single-payer healthcare system. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective analysis was undertaken to evaluate 1138 patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) who underwent 1017 endovascular procedures, 86 open surgeries, and 35 major amputations between 2013 and 2016. A cost-mix analysis was performed on individual patient data generated for selected diagnosis-related groups. Mean costs are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: There was no intergroup difference in demographics or private health insurance status. However, the amputation group had a higher proportion of emergency procedures (68.6% vs 13.3% vs 27.9%, p<0.001) and critical limb ischemia (88.6% vs 35.9% vs 37.2%, p<0.001) compared with the endovascular therapy and open surgery groups, respectively. The endovascular revascularization group spent less time in hospital and used fewer intensive care unit (ICU) resources compared with the open surgery and major amputation groups (hospital length of stay: 3.4 vs 10.0 vs 20.2 days, p<0.01; ICU: 2.4 vs 22.6 vs 54.6 hours, p<0.01), respectively. While mean prosthetic and device costs were higher in the endovascular group [AUD$2770 vs AUD$1658 (open) and AUD$1219 (amputation), p<0.01], substantial disparities were observed in costs associated with longer operating theater times, length of stay, and ICU utilization, which resulted in significantly higher costs in the open and amputation groups. After adjusting for confounders, the AUD$18,396 (95% CI AUD$16,436 to AUD$20,356) mean cost per admission for the endovascular revascularization group was significantly less (p<0.001) than the open surgery (AUD$31,908, 95% CI AUD$28,285 to AUD$35,530) and major amputation groups (AUD$43,033, 95% CI AUD$37,706 to AUD$48,361). CONCLUSION: Endovascular revascularization procedures for PAD cost the health payer less compared with open surgery and primary amputation. While devices used to deliver contemporary endovascular therapy are more expensive, the reduction in bed days, ICU utilization, and related hospital resources results in a significantly lower mean total cost per admission for the initial treatment.

Impact of Two Attendings on the Outcomes of Microvascular Limb Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Free tissue transfers are routinely performed for extremity reconstruction. In an era of increasing economic pressure in many healthcare systems, efficiency needs to be optimized for any kind of operative procedure. This study is examining the possible benefit of a two-attending approach to microsurgical reconstruction of the limbs using antero-lateral thigh- (ALT) or gracilis-muscle flaps at a major academic microsurgical center. METHODS: 309 patients underwent 392 free ALT- (206) or gracilis-muscle (186) flaps for limb defect reconstruction at our institution (2009-2015). All available data was retrospectively screened for patients' demographics, perioperative details, surgical complications, and overall flap survival. The cases were divided into two groups according to the number of operating microsurgeons: one versus two attendings. RESULTS: No significant differences existed between the two groups (341 "one attending" versus 51 "two attendings") regarding preoperative comorbidities. Overall, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding operative times, revision surgery rates, total as well as partial flap loss, and hospital length of stay (p > 0.05) during the 3-month follow-up period. Further, evaluating ALT and gracilis flaps separately also showed no significant differences between both groups (one versus two attendings). CONCLUSION: The addition of a second operating attending does not significantly shorten surgery times, hospital length of stay, need for revision surgery, or complications rates. A two-operation surgeon approach may therefore only provide a marginal benefit in microsurgical limb reconstruction.

Determinants of midterm functional outcomes, wound healing, and resources used in a hospital-based limb preservation program.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess midterm functional status, wound healing, and in-hospital resource use among a prospective cohort of patients treated in a tertiary hospital, multidisciplinary Center for Limb Preservation. METHODS: Data were prospectively gathered on all consecutive admissions to the Center for Limb Preservation from July 2013 to October 2014 with follow-up data collection through January 2016. Limbs were staged using the Society for Vascular Surgery Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) threatened limb classification scheme at the time of hospital admission. Patients with nonatherosclerotic vascular disorders, acute limb ischemia, and trauma were excluded. RESULTS: The cohort included 128 patients with 157 threatened limbs; 8 limbs with unstageable disease were excluded. Mean age (±standard deviation [SD]) was 66 (±13) years, and median follow-up duration (interquartile range) was 395 (80-635) days. Fifty percent (n = 64/128) of patients were readmitted at least once, with a readmission rate of 20% within 30 days of the index admission. Mean total number of admissions per patient (±SD) was 1.9 ± 1.2, with mean (±SD) cumulative length of stay (cLOS) of 17.1 (±17.9) days. During follow-up, 25% of limbs required a vascular reintervention, and 45% developed recurrent wounds. There was no difference in the rate of readmission, vascular reintervention, or wound recurrence by initial WIfI stage (P > .05). At the end of the study period, 23 (26%) were alive and nonambulatory; in 20%, functional status was missing. On both univariate and multivariate analysis, end-stage renal disease and prior functional status predicted ability to ambulate independently (P < .05). WIfI stage was associated with major amputation (P = .01) and cLOS (P = .002) but not with time to wound healing. Direct hospital (inpatient) cost per limb saved was significantly higher in stage 4 patients (P < .05 for all time periods). WIfI stage was associated with cumulative in-hospital costs at 1 year and for the overall follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Among a population of patients admitted to a tertiary hospital limb preservation service, WIfI stage was predictive of midterm freedom from amputation, cLOS, and hospital costs but not of ambulatory functional status, time to wound healing, or wound recurrence. Patients presenting with limb-threatening conditions require significant inpatient care, have a high frequency of repeated hospitalizations, and are at significant risk for recurrent wounds and leg symptoms at later times. Stage 4 patients require the most intensive care and have the highest initial and aggregate hospital costs per limb saved. However, limb salvage can be achieved in these patients with a dedicated multidisciplinary team approach.

Treating Peripheral Artery Disease in the Wake of Rising Costs and Protracted Length of Stay.

BACKGROUND: There has been growing scrutiny in the treatment of patients with peripheral artery disease due to the utilization of resources to manage this complex patient population. The purpose of this study was to determine the factors associated with prolonged length of stay (LOS > 7 days) following lower extremity bypass using data from the Vascular Quality Initiative as well as to define the additional costs incurred due to prolonged LOS in our health system. METHODS: Summary statistics were performed of patients undergoing lower extremity bypass from 2010 to 2015. Student's t-tests and χ2 tests were performed to compare those with and without prolonged LOS. Multivariable logistic regression was then performed to determine the independent predictors for increased LOS. We then compared our institutional LOS with that of representative institutions from the University Health System Consortium and evaluated the impact of prolonged LOS on limb salvage and survival. RESULTS: This study included 334 patients with a mean age of 66.4 ± 12.4 years, 64.7% males, 58.5% of white race, 11.1% on dialysis, 80.5% smokers, and 53.6% with diabetes. The mean LOS was 15.7 ± 12.2 days. Prolonged LOS was associated with transfer (15.4% vs. 2.3%, P = 0.001), diabetes (58.3% vs. 40.2%, P = 0.004), critical limb ischemia (71.3% vs. 49.4%, P < 0.001), preoperative need for ambulatory assistance (44.5% vs. 16.1%, P < 0.001), prior ipsilateral bypass (6.9% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.042), urgent surgery (39.7% vs. 9.8%, P < 0.001), tibial or distal target vessel (52.7% vs. 28.0%, P < 0.001), use of vein (65.4% vs. 46.3%, P = 0.002), return to operating room (42.6% vs. 1.2%, P < 0.001), ambulatory assistance (65.0% vs. 34.1%, P < 0.001) as well as discharge anticoagulant (22.8% vs. 9.8%, P = 0.010). Multivariable logistic regression identified urgency (odds ratio [OR] = 5.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.16-12.02, P < 0.001), critical limb ischemia (OR = 3.12, 95% CI 1.65-5.90, P < 0.001), return to OR (OR = 40.30, 95% CI 5.36-303.20, P < 0.001), use of vein (OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.18-4.07, P = 0.013), and the need for anticoagulation at discharge (OR = 2.56, 95% CI 1.03-6.33, P = 0.043) as independent predictors of LOS > 7 days. Prolonged hospital stays accounted for an additional $40,561.64 in total cost and $26,028 in direct costs incurred. Despite these increased costs, limb salvage and overall survival were not adversely impacted in the prolonged LOS group in follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Lower extremity bypass is associated with a longer than expected LOS in our health system, much of which can be attributed to return to the OR for minor amputations and wound issues. This led to added total and direct costs, where the majority of this increase was attributable to prolonged LOS. Limb salvage and overall survival were preserved, however, in this subset of patients in follow-up. These findings suggest that lower extremity bypass patients are a resource-intensive population of patients, but that these costs are worthwhile in the setting of preserved limb salvage and overall survival.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Initial Treatment Strategies for Nonembolic Acute Limb Ischemia Using Real-Word Data.

BACKGROUND: Nonembolic acute limb ischemia (ALI) is a condition characterized by a sudden decrease in limb perfusion and requires immediate interventions. There are multiple treatment options available including surgery, catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), endovascular procedures, and hybrid treatment (a combination of open and endovascular techniques). Randomized trials provide information only on clinical efficacy, but not on economic outcomes. The objective of the study was to perform the cost-effective analysis comparing different treatment alternatives of ALI. METHODS: The data were collected from 4r ProMedica community hospitals in the Northwest Ohio from January 2009 to December 2012. Patients were included if they were treated within 14 days of onset of symptoms for nonembolic ALI and were divided into groups of receiving CDT, surgery, endovascular, or hybrid treatments. Demographics, comorbidities, medications taken before admission, and smoking status were collected at baseline for all patients and were compared among the treatment groups. A cost-effectiveness decision tree was developed to calculate expected costs and life years gained associated with available treatment options. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also performed to check the robustness of the model. RESULTS: A population of 205 patients with the diagnosis of ALI was included and divided into different treatment groups. There was no major significant difference in baseline characteristics among the studied groups (P > 0.05). The total costs were $17,163.47 for surgery, $20,620.39 for endovascular, $21,277.61 for hybrid, and $30,675.42 for CDT. The life years gained were 17.25 for surgery, 18 for endovascular, 18 for hybrid, and 17 for CDT. CDT was dominated because of the high cost and the low effectiveness, while hybrid treatment was dominated when compared with endovascular treatment because these 2 treatments have similar outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the endovascular group over the surgery group was found to be $4,609.23 per life year gained. The sensitivity analysis showed that the endovascular treatment was found to be cost-effective under willingness to pay $50,000. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides economic evaluation of ALI treatments for a defined clinical population in the real-world setting. Compared with other available alternatives, the endovascular treatment showed to be a cost-effective use of healthcare resources.

Comparative Assessment of Procedure Cost and Outcomes Between Guidewire and Crossing Device Strategies to Cross Peripheral Artery Chronic Total Occlusions.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess actual procedural costs and outcomes comparing wire-catheter and dedicated chronic total occlusion (CTO) device strategies to cross peripheral artery CTOs. BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery CTO interventions are frequently performed, but there are limited data on actual procedural costs and outcomes comparing wire-catheter and dedicated CTO devices. METHODS: The XLPAD (Excellence in Peripheral Artery Disease Intervention) registry (NCT01904851) was accessed to retrospectively compare cost and 30-day and 12-month outcomes of wire-catheter and crossing device strategies for treatment of infrainguinal peripheral artery CTO. RESULTS: Of all 3,234 treated lesions, 42% (n = 1,362) were CTOs in 1,006 unique patients. Wire-catheter approaches were used in 82% of CTOs, whereas dedicated CTO devices were used in 18% (p < 0.0001). CTO crossing device use was associated with significantly higher technical success (74% vs. 65%; p < 0.0001) and mean procedure cost ($7,800.09 vs. $4,973.24; p < 0.0001). Because 12-month repeat revascularization (11.3% vs. 17.2%; p = 0.02) and amputation rates (2.8% vs. 8.5%; p = 0.002) in the CTO crossing device arm were lower compared with the wire-catheter group, the net cost for an initial CTO crossing device strategy was $423.80 per procedure. CONCLUSIONS: An initial wire-catheter approach to cross a peripheral artery CTO is most frequently adopted. The use of dedicated CTO crossing devices provides significantly higher technical success and lower reintervention and amputation rates, at a net cost of $423.80 per procedure at 12 months.

The accuracy and cost-effectiveness of strategies used to identify peripheral artery disease among patients with diabetic foot ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) should be evaluated for peripheral artery disease (PAD). We sought to estimate the overall diagnostic accuracy for various strategies that are used to identify PAD in this population. METHODS: A Markov model with probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses was used to simulate the clinical events in a population of 10,000 patients with diabetes. One of 14 different diagnostic strategies was applied to those who developed DFUs. Baseline data on diagnostic accuracy of individual noninvasive tests were based on a meta-analysis of previously reported studies. The overall sensitivity and cost-effectiveness of the 14 strategies were then compared. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of various combinations of diagnostic testing strategies ranged from 32.6% to 92.6%. Cost-effective strategies included ankle-brachial indices for all patients; skin perfusion pressures (SPPs) or toe-brachial indices (TBIs) for all patients; and SPPs or TBIs to corroborate normal pulse examination findings, a strategy that lowered leg amputation rates by 36%. Strategies that used noninvasive vascular testing to investigate only abnormal pulse examination results had low overall diagnostic sensitivity and were weakly dominated in cost-effectiveness evaluations. Population prevalence of PAD did not alter strategy ordering by diagnostic accuracy or cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: TBIs or SPPs used uniformly or to corroborate a normal pulse examination finding are among the most sensitive and cost-effective strategies to improve the identification of PAD among patients presenting with DFUs. These strategies may significantly reduce leg amputation rates with only modest increases in cost.

The financial burden of surgical and endovascular treatment of diabetic foot wounds.

OBJECTIVE: The cost of treating diabetes-related disease in New Zealand is increasing and is expected to reach New Zealand dollars (NZD) 1.8 billion in 2021. The financial burden attached to the treatment of diabetic foot wounds is difficult to quantify and reported costs of treatment vary greatly in the literature. As of yet, no study has captured the true total cost of treating a diabetic foot wound. In this study, we investigate the total minimum cost of treating a diabetic foot ulcer at a tertiary institution. METHODS: A retrospective audit of hospital and interhospital records was performed to identify adult patients with diabetes who were treated operatively for a diabetic foot wound by the department of vascular surgery at Auckland Hospital between January 2009 and June 2014. Costs from the patients' admissions and outpatient clinics from their first meeting to the achievement of a final outcome were tallied to calculate the total cost of healing the wound. The hospital's expenses were calculated using a fully absorbed activity-based costing methodology and correlated with a variety of demographic and clinical factors extracted from patients' electronic records using a general linear mixed model. RESULTS: We identified 225 patients accounting for 265 wound episodes, 700 inpatient admissions, 815 outpatient consultations, 367 surgical procedures, and 248 endovascular procedures. The total minimum cost to the Auckland city hospital was NZD 10,217,115 (NZD 9,886,963 inpatient costs; NZD 330,152 outpatient costs). The median cost per wound episode was NZD 29,537 (NZD 28,491 inpatient costs; NZD 834 outpatient cost). Wound healing was achieved in 70% of wound episodes (average length of healing, 9 months); 19% of wounds had not healed before the patient's death. Of every 3.5 wound episodes, one required a major amputation. Wound treatment modality, particularly surgical management, was the strongest predictor of high resource utilization. Wounds treated with endovascular intervention and no surgical intervention cost less. Surgical management (indiscriminate of type) was associated with faster wound healing than wounds managed endovascularly (median duration, 140 vs 224 days). Clinical risk factors including smoking, ischemic heart disease, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease did not affect treatment cost significantly. CONCLUSIONS: We estimate the minimum median cost incurred by our department of vascular surgery in treating a diabetic foot wound to be NZD 30,000 and identify wound treatment modality to be a significant determinant of cost. While readily acknowledging our study's inherent limitations, we believe it provides a real-world representation of the minimum total cost involved in treating diabetic foot lesions in a tertiary center. Given the increasing rate of diabetes, we believe this high cost reinforces the need for the establishment of a multidisciplinary diabetic foot team in our region.

Cost and mortality data of a regional limb salvage and hyperbaric medicine program for Wagner Grade 3 or 4 diabetic foot ulcers.

We obtained costs and mortality data in two retrospective cohorts totaling 159 patients who have diabetes mellitus and onset of a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). Data were collected from 2005 to 2013, with a follow-up period through September 30, 2014. A total of 106 patients entered an evidence-based limb salvage protocol (LSP) for Wagner Grade 3 or 4 (WG3/4) DFU and intention-to-treat adjunctive hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy. A second cohort of 53 patients had a primary lower extremity amputation (LEA), either below the knee (BKA) or above the knee (AKA) and were not part of the LSP. Ninety-six of 106 patients completed the LSP/HBO2with an average cost of USD $33,100. Eighty-eight of 96 patients (91.7%) who completed the LSP/HBO2had intact lower extremities at one year. Thirty-four of the 96 patients (35.4%) died during the follow-up period. Costs for a historical cohort of 53 patients having a primary major LEA range from USD $66,300 to USD $73,000. Twenty-five of the 53 patients (47.2%) died. The difference in cost of care and mortality between an LSP with adjunctive HBO2therapy vs. primary LEA is staggering. We conclude that an aggressive limb salvage program that includes HBO2 therapy is cost-effective.

Burden of Infected Diabetic Foot Ulcers on Hospital Admissions and Costs.

BACKGROUND: Costs related to diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) care are greater than $1 billion annually and rising. We sought to describe the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on foot ulcer admissions in the United States, and to investigate potential explanations for rising hospital costs. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2005-2010) was queried using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9) codes for a primary diagnosis of foot ulceration. Multivariable analyses were used to compare outcomes and per-admission costs among patients with foot ulceration and DM versus non-DM. RESULTS: In total, 962,496 foot ulcer patients were admitted over the study period. The overall rate of admissions was relatively stable over time, but the ratio of DM versus non-DM admissions increased significantly (2005: 10.2 vs. 2010: 12.7; P < 0.001). Neuropathy and infection accounted for 90% of DFU admissions, while peripheral vascular disease accounted for most non-DM admissions. Admissions related to infection rose significantly among DM patients (2005: 39,682 vs. 2010: 51,660; P < 0.001), but remained stable among non-DM patients. Overall, DM accounted for 83% and 96% of all major and minor amputations related to foot ulcers, respectively, and significantly increased cost of care (DM: $1.38 vs. non-DM: $0.13 billion/year; P < 0.001). Hospital costs per DFU admission were significantly higher for patients with infection compared with all other causes ($11,290 vs. $8,145; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes increases the incidence of foot ulcer admissions by 11-fold, accounting for more than 80% of all amputations and increasing hospital costs more than 10-fold over the 5 years. The majority of these costs are related to the treatment of infected foot ulcers. Education initiatives and early prevention strategies through outpatient multidisciplinary care targeted at high-risk populations are essential to preventing further increases in what is already a substantial economic burden.

Costs of Real-Life Endovascular Treatment of Critical Limb Ischemia: Report from Poland-A European Union Country with a Low-Budget Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: To analyze the costs of inhospital, percutaneous treatment of patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) carried out in Poland, a European Union country with a low-budget national health system. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on all patients admitted to a tertiary care hospital for endovascular treatment of CLI over 1 year. SETTING: A single, large volume, tertiary angiology center located in Southern Poland. PARTICIPANTS: CLI patients due to aortoiliac, femoropopliteal, or infrapopliteal arterial stenoses or occlusions with indications for first-line endovascular therapy or similar patients who refused open surgical procedure despite having primary indications for vascular surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Direct stenting using bare-metal stents was the primary mode of treatment for lesions located within the aortoiliac and femoropopliteal arterial segments. Plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) was the second most commonly used technique. For below-the-knee arteries, POBA was the mainstay of treatment, which was occasionally supported by drug-eluting stent angioplasty. Directional atherectomy, scoring balloon angioplasty, or local fibrinolysis was used infrequently. Drug-eluting balloon percutaneous transluminal angioplasty was not used. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were the mean reimbursement of costs provided by the Polish National Health Fund (NHF) for inhospital treatment of patients for whom endovascular procedures were performed as initial treatment for CLI and the inhospital costs of endovascular treatment calculated by the caregiver in the 2 years since the first procedure. The average total number of days spent in hospital, amputation-free survival (AFS), overall survival (OS), and limb salvage rate (LSR) according to a life-table method were also calculated for the 2 years. RESULTS: In the first year, there were 496 endovascular and 15 surgical hospitalizations for revascularization procedures to treat 340 limbs in 327 patients, with a further 53 revascularization procedures in the second year. There were an additional 90 hospitalizations over the first year and 38 over the second year for CLI-associated cardiovascular comorbidities. The mean reimbursement for hospitalizations of patients included into observation, provided by the NHF, was $4901.94 per patient for the first year and $833.57 per patient alive to the second year. The mean cost of hospitalization for percutaneous revascularization treatment was $3804.25 per patient for the first year and $3340.30 per patient requiring revascularization within the second year. All costs were calculated in constant 2011 USD. The average total number of days spent in hospital was 8.4 days for the first year and 1.97 days per patient alive to the second year. At 1 and 2 years, the AFS was 76.8% and 66.6%, the OS was 86.5% and 77.3%, and the LSR was 89.4% and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular therapy using the currently available techniques can be performed in almost all patients suffering from CLI at relatively low costs, and satisfactory results can be obtained. Physicians play a pivotal role in ensuring quality of treatment and the reduction of treatment cost in these patients.