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.

Economic Evaluation of Complete Revascularization for Patients with Multivessel Disease Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of complete revascularization at index admission compared with infarct-related artery (IRA) treatment only, in patients with multivessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (P-PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS: An economic evaluation of a multicenter randomized trial was conducted, comparing complete revascularization at index admission to IRA-only P-PCI in patients with multivessel disease (12-month follow-up). Overall hospital costs (costs for P-PCI procedure(s), hospital length of stay, and any subsequent re-admissions) were estimated. Outcomes were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs, a composite of all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, heart failure, and ischemia-driven revascularization) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) derived from the three-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire. Multiple imputation was undertaken. The mean incremental cost and effect, with associated 95% confidence intervals, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve were estimated. RESULTS: On the basis of 296 patients, the mean incremental overall hospital cost for complete revascularization was estimated to be -£215.96 (-£1390.20 to £958.29), compared with IRA-only, with a per-patient mean reduction in MACEs of 0.170 (0.044 to 0.296) and a QALY gain of 0.011 (-0.019 to 0.041). According to the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve, the probability of complete revascularization being cost-effective was estimated to be 72.0% at a willingness-to-pay threshold value of £20,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Complete revascularization at index admission was estimated to be more effective (in terms of MACEs and QALYs) and cost-effective (overall costs were estimated to be lower and complete revascularization thereby dominated IRA-only). There was, however, some uncertainty associated with this decision.

Cost-minimization analysis of three decision strategies for cardiac revascularization: results of the "suspected CAD" cohort of the european cardiovascular magnetic resonance registry.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) continues to be one of the top public health burden. Perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is generally accepted to detect CAD, while data on its cost effectiveness are scarce. Therefore, the goal of the study was to compare the costs of a CMR-guided strategy vs two invasive strategies in a large CMR registry. METHODS: In 3'647 patients with suspected CAD of the EuroCMR-registry (59 centers/18 countries) costs were calculated for diagnostic examinations (CMR, X-ray coronary angiography (CXA) with/without FFR), revascularizations, and complications during a 1-year follow-up. Patients with ischemia-positive CMR underwent an invasive CXA and revascularization at the discretion of the treating physician (=CMR + CXA-strategy). In the hypothetical invasive arm, costs were calculated for an initial CXA and a FFR in vessels with ≥50% stenoses (=CXA + FFR-strategy) and the same proportion of revascularizations and complications were applied as in the CMR + CXA-strategy. In the CXA-only strategy, costs included those for CXA and for revascularizations of all ≥50% stenoses. To calculate the proportion of patients with ≥50% stenoses, the stenosis-FFR relationship from the literature was used. Costs of the three strategies were determined based on a third payer perspective in 4 healthcare systems. RESULTS: Revascularizations were performed in 6.2%, 4.5%, and 12.9% of all patients, patients with atypical chest pain (n = 1'786), and typical angina (n = 582), respectively; whereas complications (=all-cause death and non-fatal infarction) occurred in 1.3%, 1.1%, and 1.5%, respectively. The CMR + CXA-strategy reduced costs by 14%, 34%, 27%, and 24% in the German, UK, Swiss, and US context, respectively, when compared to the CXA + FFR-strategy; and by 59%, 52%, 61% and 71%, respectively, versus the CXA-only strategy. In patients with typical angina, cost savings by CMR + CXA vs CXA + FFR were minimal in the German (2.3%), intermediate in the US and Swiss (11.6% and 12.8%, respectively), and remained substantial in the UK (18.9%) systems. Sensitivity analyses proved the robustness of results. CONCLUSIONS: A CMR + CXA-strategy for patients with suspected CAD provides substantial cost reduction compared to a hypothetical CXA + FFR-strategy in patients with low to intermediate disease prevalence. However, in the subgroup of patients with typical angina, cost savings were only minimal to moderate.

Clinical and economic burden associated with cardiovascular events among patients with hyperlipidemia: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Annual direct costs for cardiovascular (CV) diseases in the United States are approximately $195.6 billion, with many high-risk patients remaining at risk for major cardiovascular events (CVE). This study evaluated the direct clinical and economic burden associated with new CVE up to 3 years post-event among patients with hyperlipidemia. METHODS: Hyperlipidemic patients with a primary inpatient claim for new CVE (myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, coronary artery bypass graft, percutaneous coronary intervention and heart failure) were identified using IMS LifeLink PharMetrics Plus data from January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2012. Patients were stratified by CV risk into history of CVE, modified coronary heart disease risk equivalent, moderate- and low-risk cohorts. Of the eligible patients, propensity score matched 243,640 patients with or without new CVE were included to compare healthcare resource utilization and direct costs ranging from the acute (1-month) phase through 3 years post-CVE date (follow-up period). RESULTS: Myocardial infarction was the most common CVE in all the risk cohorts. During the acute phase, among patients with new CVE, the average incremental inpatient length of stay and incremental costs ranged from 4.4-6.2 days and $25,666-$30,321, respectively. Acute-phase incremental costs accounted for 61-75% of first-year costs, but incremental costs also remained high during years 2 and 3 post-CVE. CONCLUSIONS: Among hyperlipidemic patients with new CVE, healthcare utilization and costs incurred were significantly higher than for those without CVE during the acute phase, and remained higher up to 3 years post-event, across all risk cohorts.

Comparison of Index Hospitalization Costs Between Robotic CABG and Conventional CABG: Implications for Hybrid Coronary Revascularization.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the direct costs of the index hospitalization and 30-day morbidity and mortality incurred during robotic and conventional coronary artery bypass grafting at a single institution based on hospital clinical and financial records. DESIGN: Retrospective study, propensity-matched groups with one-to-one nearest neighbor matching. SETTING: University hospital, a tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand eighty-eight consecutive patients who underwent primary coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) from January 2007 to March 2012. INTERVENTIONS: One hundred forty-one matched pairs were created and analyzed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Robotic CABG was associated with a decrease in operative time (5.61±1.1 v 6.6±1.15 hours, p<0.001), a lower need for blood transfusion (12.8% v 22.6%, p = 0.04), a shorter length of stay (6 [4-9]) v 7 [5-11] days, p = 0.001), a shorter ICU stay (31 [24-49] hours v 52 [32-96.5] hours, p<0.001) and lower NY state complications composite rate (4.26% v 13.48%, p = 0.01). In spite of that, the cost of robotic procedures was not significantly different from matched conventional cases ($18,717.35 [11,316.1-34,550.6] versus $18,601 [13,137-50,194.75], p = 0.13), except 26 hybrid coronary revascularizations in which angioplasty was performed on the same admission (hybrid 25,311.1 [18,537.1-41,167.85] versus conventional 18,966.13 [13,337.75-56,021.75], p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Robotically assisted CABG does not increase the cost of the index hospitalization when compared to conventional CABG unless hybrid revascularization is performed on the same admission.

Variation in cost-effectiveness in coronary revascularization: a new paradigm for evaluation?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cost-effectiveness has become an increasingly important tool in assessing the value of healthcare. The principles of cost-effectiveness and the need to standardize the methodology are discussed. Documented variation could be used to adjust reimbursement. RECENT FINDINGS: The US healthcare system continues to be under financial pressure. Although national health expenditures have slowed, growth rates continue to outpace gross domestic product. Spending in the coming years is expected to grow 7% annually. Treatment of cardiac disease, and in particular ischemic heart disease, is a significant portion of healthcare spending. A strategy to improve clinical and financial outcomes for revascularization procedures is essential. Recently, the SYNTAX trial and ASCERT have addressed cost-effectiveness as an outcome measure in revascularization for coronary artery disease. SUMMARY: Cost-effectiveness is becoming an important part of healthcare provider performance and patient outcomes. Difficulties in obtaining cost, resource use, and quality of life data are not insurmountable as recently documented in randomized and observational trials. Reimbursement has already been linked to costs and resource use in current regulation. As the payment systems move toward disease management, cost-effectiveness will be the measure of choice. The prevalence of cardiac disease in the US population will mandate its use in adjusting payments to these providers.

The aging Canadian population and hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction: projection to 2020.

BACKGROUND: The risk of experiencing an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) increases with age and Canada's population is aging. The objective of this analysis was to examine trends in the AMI hospitalization rate in Canada between 2002 and 2009 and to estimate the potential increase in the number of AMI hospitalizations over the next decade. METHODS: Aggregated data on annual AMI hospitalizations were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information for all provinces and territories, except Quebec, for 2002/03 and 2009/10. Using these data in a Poisson regression model to control for age, gender and year, the rate of AMI hospitalizations was extrapolated between 2010 and 2020. The extrapolated rate and Statistics Canada population projections were used to estimate the number of AMI hospitalizations in 2020. RESULTS: The rates of AMI hospitalizations by gender and age group showed a decrease between 2002 and 2009 in patients aged ≥ 65 years and relatively stable rates in those aged < 64 years in both males and females. However, the total number of AMI hospitalizations in Canada (excluding Quebec) is projected to increase by 4667 from 51847 in 2009 to 56514 in 2020, a 9.0% increase. Inflating this number to account for the unavailable Quebec data results in an increase of approximately 6200 for the whole of Canada. This would amount to an additional cost of between $46 and $54 million and sensitivity analyses indicate that it could be between $36 and $65 million. CONCLUSIONS: Despite projected decreasing or stable rates of AMI hospitalization, the number of hospitalizations is expected to increase substantially as a result of the aging of the Canadian population. The cost of these hospitalizations will be substantial. An increase of this extent in the number of AMI hospitalizations and the ensuing costs would significantly impact the already over-stretched Canadian healthcare system.

Temporal trends in the use of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State and Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare reform initiatives in the United States have rekindled debate about the role of government regulation in the healthcare system. Although New York State (NYS) historically has had twice as many coronary revascularizations performed as Ontario, the relative evolution of coronary revascularization patterns in both jurisdictions over time is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted an observational study comparing the temporal trends of cardiac invasive procedures use in NYS and Ontario using population-based data from 1997 to 2006 stratified by procedure indication. For nonacute myocardial infarction patients, the age- and sex-adjusted rate of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was 2.3 times (95% confidence interval, 2.2 to 2.5) greater in NYS than in Ontario in 2004 to 2006. In contrast, population-based rates of coronary artery bypass grafting among nonacute myocardial infarction patients were not significantly different. For acute myocardial infarction patients, differences in coronary revascularization rates between NYS and Ontario narrowed substantially over time. In 2004 to 2006, the relative ratio was 1.3 times higher for PCI (95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 1.5) and 1.4 times higher (95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 1.8) for coronary artery bypass grafting in NYS relative to Ontario. However, a larger relative gap (relative ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.7 to 2.3) was observed among acute myocardial infarction patients undergoing emergency PCIs in NYS compared with Ontario. CONCLUSIONS: The market-oriented financing approach in NYS is associated with markedly higher rates of PCI procedures for both discretionary indications (eg, PCI in nonacute myocardial infarction patients) and emergent indications (eg, primary PCI) compared with the government-funded single-payer system in Ontario.

Association of coronary CT angiography or stress testing with subsequent utilization and spending among Medicare beneficiaries.

CONTEXT: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is a new noninvasive diagnostic test for coronary artery disease (CAD), but its association with subsequent clinical management has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To compare utilization and spending associated with functional (stress testing) and anatomical (CCTA) noninvasive cardiac testing in a Medicare population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective, observational cohort study using claims data from a 20% random sample of 2005-2008 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries 66 years or older with no claims for CAD in the preceding year, who received nonemergent, noninvasive testing for CAD (n = 282,830). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cardiac catheterization, coronary revascularization, acute myocardial infarction, all-cause mortality, and total and CAD-related Medicare spending over 180 days of follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with stress myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), CCTA was associated with an increased likelihood of subsequent cardiac catheterization (22.9% vs 12.1%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.19 [95% CI, 2.08 to 2.32]; P < .001), percutaneous coronary intervention (7.8% vs 3.4%; AOR, 2.49 [2.28 to 2.72]; P < .001), and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (3.7% vs 1.3%; AOR, 3.00 [2.63 to 3.41]; P < .001). CCTA was also associated with higher total health care spending ($4200 [$3193 to $5267]; P < .001), which was almost entirely attributable to payments for any claims for CAD ($4007 [$3256 to $4835]; P < .001). Compared with MPS, there was lower associated spending with stress echocardiography (-$4981 [-$4991 to -$4969]; P < .001) and exercise electrocardiography (-$7449 [-$7452 to -$7444]; P < .001). At 180 days, CCTA was associated with a similar likelihood of all-cause mortality (1.05% vs 1.28%; AOR, 1.11 [0.88 to 1.38]; P = .32) and a slightly lower likelihood of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (0.19% vs 0.43%; AOR, 0.60 [0.37 to 0.98]; P = .04). CONCLUSION: Medicare beneficiaries who underwent CCTA in a nonacute setting were more likely to undergo subsequent invasive cardiac procedures and have higher CAD-related spending than patients who underwent stress testing.

Temporal changes in coronary revascularization procedures, outcomes, and costs in the bare-metal stent and drug-eluting stent eras: results from the US Medicare program.

BACKGROUND: Although drug-eluting stents have been shown to be cost-effective compared with bare-metal stents for select clinical trial patients, whether these findings apply to the general population is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used data from the Medicare 5% Standard Analytic Files to compare the practice and outcomes of coronary revascularization (by either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting) in the United States between 2001 (pre-drug-eluting stent era, n=14 362) and 2004 (post-drug-eluting stent era, n=16 374). Between 2001 and 2004, the rate of revascularization increased from 837 to 931 per 100 000, whereas the proportion of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention as an initial revascularization procedure increased from 67.5% to 75.2% (P<0.001). Over a median follow-up period of 25.5 months, no significant changes in mortality were found between 2001 and 2004 (13.8% versus 13.3%, P=0.193). Significant decreases were seen, however, in the incidence of repeat revascularization (17.1% versus 16.0%, P=0.012) and myocardial infarction (10.6% versus 8.5%, P<0.001). Over this same time period, total cardiovascular care costs per revascularized patient decreased by $1680 (95% confidence interval $1164 to $2196, P<0.001) whereas total noncardiovascular costs increased by $2481 per patient (95% confidence interval $1844 to $3118, P<0.001). When the impact of overall procedural volumes was considered, aggregate cost to the Medicare program for cardiovascular services increased by $544 million over the 2-year follow-up period. Risk-adjusted results for both the clinical and economic outcomes showed similar trends. CONCLUSIONS: Among the Medicare population undergoing coronary revascularization, the introduction of drug-eluting stents was associated with increased use of initial percutaneous coronary intervention and reduced bypass surgery along with improved clinical outcomes over approximately 2 years of follow-up. Although total cardiovascular-related costs per revascularized patient decreased over this time period, total cost to the Medicare system still increased owing to greater overall use of revascularization procedures.

High or low risk coronary patients - who gets the highest priority?

Coronary revascularisation is more often used in patients at small risk and with little to gain than in patients at high risk and much to gain. This is against current guide-lines and is wasteful. The problem if aggravated by socioeconomic bias. A redesigned reimbursement system, based on measured improved quality of life and survival, would encourage a more efficient use of resources.

Increasing resources effected equity in access to revascularizations for patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: To examine differences in access to coronary revascularization among a cohort of coronary patients with and without diabetes in 1995-2002 in Finland and to examine how rapidly increasing resources effected socioeconomic equity in access to these operations. DESIGN: An individual level nationwide register-based study of newly diagnosed CHD (coronary heart disease) patients (aged 40-79) in Finland. Rates for revascularizations were calculated per 1 000 person years. Socioeconomic differences were examined using Cox regression. RESULTS: Revascularization rates increased from 354 to 443 per 1 000 person years among men with CHD and from 301 to 366 among patients with diabetes. Among women with CHD the numbers were 224 and 249 and among patients with diabetes 208 and 325. Comparing trends for first revascularization between patient groups with and without diabetes differences increased somewhat among men. Among women, revascularization rates increased more among diabetic patients. Lower revascularization rates among lower socioeconomic groups were found throughout the study period in both patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneously with large increase in cardiac operation rates, revascularization observed more common among women with diabetes compared to those without. However socioeconomic inequity in access to revascularizations among both genders remained even after increase in resources.

Characteristics of Contemporary Randomized Clinical Trials and Their Association With the Trial Funding Source in Invasive Cardiovascular Interventions.

Importance: Changes in evidence-based practice and guideline recommendations depend on high-quality randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Commercial device and pharmaceutical manufacturers are frequently involved in the funding, design, conduct, and reporting of trials, the implications of which have not been recently analyzed. Objective: To evaluate the design, outcomes, and reporting of contemporary randomized clinical trials of invasive cardiovascular interventions and their association with the funding source. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed published RCTs between January 1, 2008, to May 31, 2019. The trials included those involving coronary, vascular and structural interventional cardiology, and vascular and cardiac surgical procedures. Main Outcomes and Measures: We assessed (1) trial characteristics, (2) finding of a statistically significant difference in the primary end point favoring the experimental intervention, (3) reporting of implied treatment advantage in trials without significant differences in primary end point, (4) existence of major discrepancies between registered and published primary outcomes, (5) number of patients whose outcomes would need to switch from a nonevent to an event to convert a significant difference in primary end point to nonsignificant, and (6) association with funding source. Results: Of the 216 RCTs analyzed, 115 (53.2%) reported having commercial sponsorship. Most trials had 80% power to detect an estimated treatment effect of 30%, and 128 trials (59.3%) used composite primary end points. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) sample size was 502 (204-1702) patients, and the median (IQR) follow-up duration was 12 (1.0-14.4) months. Overall, 123 trials (57.0%) reported a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome favoring the experimental intervention; reporting strategies that implied an advantage were identified in 55 (65.5%) of 84 trials that reported nonsignificant differences. Commercial sponsorship was associated with a statistically significantly greater likelihood of favorable outcomes reporting (exponent of regression coefficient ß, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.09-7.18; P = .03) and with the reporting of findings that are inconsistent with the trial results. Discrepancies between the registered and published primary outcomes were found in 82 trials (38.0%), without differences in trial sponsorship. A median (IQR) number of 5 (2.8-12.5) patients experiencing a different outcome would have change statistically significant results to nonsignificant. Commercial sponsorship was associated with a greater number of patients (exponent of regression coefficient ß, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.00-1.66; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that contemporary RCTs of invasive cardiovascular interventions are relatively small and fragile, have short follow-up, and have limited power to detect large treatment effects. Commercial support appeared to be associated with differences in trial design, results, and reporting.

Cost-effectiveness for imaging stable ischemic disease.

Stable ischemic heart disease remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Although there are multiple imaging modalities to diagnose and/or assist in the clinical management, the most cost-effective approach remains unclear. We reviewed the relevant and recent evidence-based clinical studies and trials to suggest the most cost-effective approach to stable ischemic heart disease. The limitations of these studies are discussed. Incorporating the results of recent multicenter trials, we suggest that for appropriate patients with coronary artery disease with any degree of stenosis or presence of coronary calcium, optimal medical therapy may be most cost-effective. Invasive coronary angiography and/or coronary revascularization would be primarily for non-responders or >/=50% left main stenosis. Stress cardiac magnetic imaging would be performed for those patients with non-diagnostic coronary CT angiography from motion and non-responders from optimal medical therapy in non-diagnostic coronary CT angiography group from high coronary calcium. These paths seem to be safe and cost-effective but requires modeling for confirmation.

Impact of medicaid expansion on disparities in revascularization in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction.

INTRODUCTION: Blacks are more likely to live in poverty and be uninsured, and are less likely to undergo revascularization after am acute myocardial infarction compared to whites. The objective of this study was to determine whether Medicaid expansion was associated with a reduction in revascularization disparities in patients admitted with an acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: Retrospective analysis study using data (2010-2018) from hospitals participating in the University Health Systems Consortium, now renamed the Vizient Clinical Database. Comparative interrupted time series analysis was used to compare changes in the use of revascularization therapies (PCI and CABG) in white versus non-Hispanic black patients hospitalized with either ST-segment elevation (STEMI) or non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarctions (NSTEMI) after Medicaid expansion. RESULTS: The analytic cohort included 68,610 STEMI and 127,378 NSTEMI patients. The percentage point decrease in the uninsured rate for STEMIs and NSTEMIs was greater for blacks in expansion states compared to whites in expansion states. For patients with STEMIs, differences in black versus white revascularization rates decreased by 2.09 percentage points per year (95% CI, 0.29-3.88, P = 0.023) in expansion versus non-expansion states after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. Black patients hospitalized with STEMI in non-expansion states experienced a 7.24 percentage point increase in revascularization rate in 2014 (95% CI, 2.83-11.7, P < 0.001) but did not experience significant annual percentage point increases in the rate of revascularization in subsequent years (1.52; 95% CI, -0.51-3.55, P = 0.14) compared to whites in non-expansion states. Medicaid expansion was not associated with changes in the revascularization rate for either blacks or whites hospitalized with NSTEMIs. CONCLUSION: Medicaid expansion was associated with greater reductions in the number of uninsured blacks compared to uninsured whites. Medicaid expansion was not associated, however, with a reduction in revascularization disparities between black and white patients admitted with acute myocardial infarctions.

Comparison of NICE and ESC proposed strategies on new onset chest pain and the contemporary clinical utility of pretest probability risk score.

AIMS: Patients with de novo chest pain are usually investigated non-invasively. The new UK-National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommend CT coronary angiography (CTCA) for all patients, while European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends functional tests. We sought to compare the clinical utility and perform a cost analysis of these recommendations in two UK centres with different primary investigative strategies. METHODSRESULTS: We compared two groups of patients, group A (n=667) and group B (n=654), with new onset chest pain in two neighbouring National Health Service hospitals, each primarily following either ESC (group A) or NICE (group B) guidance. We assessed the clinical utility of each strategy, including progression to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and revascularisation. We present a retrospective cost analysis in the context of UK tariff for stress echo (£176), CTCA (£220) and ICA (£1001). Finally, we sought to identify predictors of revascularisation in the whole population.Baseline characteristics in both groups were similar. The progression to ICA was comparable (9.9% vs 12.0%, p=0.377), with similar requirement for revascularisation (4.0% vs 5.0%.; p=0.532). The average cost of investigations per investigated patient was lower in group A (£279.66 vs £325.77), saving £46.11 per patient. The ESC recommended risk score (RS) was found to be the only predictor of revascularisation (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Both NICE and ESC-proposed strategies led to similar rates of ICA and need for revascularisation in discrete, but similar groups of patients. The SE-first approach had a lower overall cost by £46.11 per patient, and the ESC RS was the only variable correlated to revascularisation.

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.

Revascularization Rates and Associated Costs in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Initiating Ranolazine Versus Traditional Antianginals as Add-on Therapy.

To assess the frequency and costs of revascularization procedures in patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) initiating ranolazine versus traditional antianginals. Adults (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of SIHD who initiated ranolazine or a traditional antianginal (beta-blocker [BB], calcium channel blocker [CCB], or long-acting nitrate [LAN]) as second or third line therapy between 2008 and 2016, were selected from the IBM MarketScan Databases. Inverse probability weighting based on propensity score was employed to balance the ranolazine and traditional antianginals cohorts on patient clinical characteristics. Outcomes assessed were frequency and total cost of revascularization procedures over a 12-month follow-up. A total of 108,741 patients with SIHD were included. Of these, 18% initiated treatment with ranolazine, 21% received BBs, 24% received CCBs, and 37% were treated with LANs. Revascularization rates were significantly lower in ranolazine patients (11%) than in BB (16%) and LAN (14%) patients (both p <0.001), and more comparable to CCB patients (10%; p = 0.007). Compared with BB and LAN, those in the ranolazine cohort were less likely to have a revascularization procedure during hospitalization and had a shorter length of stay if hospitalized (all p <0.001). The mean healthcare costs associated with revascularization were lower in ranolazine patients ($2,933) than in BB ($4,465) and LAN ($3,609) patients (p <0.001), but similar to CCB patients ($2,753; p = 0.29). In conclusion, ranolazine treatment in patients with SIHD was associated with fewer revascularization procedures and lower associated healthcare costs compared with patients initiating BB or LAN, and comparable to patients initiating CCBs.

In-Hospital Management and Outcomes After ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Medicaid Beneficiaries Compared With Privately Insured Individuals.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid expansion among previously uninsured individuals has led to improved healthcare access. However, considerably lower reimbursement rates of Medicaid have raised concerns on the unintended consequence of lower utilization of life-saving therapies and inferior outcomes compared with private insurance. We examined the rates of revascularization and in-hospital mortality among Medicaid beneficiaries versus privately insured individuals hospitalized with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We queried the National Inpatient Sample from 2012 to 2015 for STEMI hospitalizations with Medicaid or private insurance as primary payer. Hospitalizations with the following criteria were excluded: (1) age <18 or ≥65 years, (2) transfer to another acute care facility, and (3) left against medical advice. Outcomes were compared in propensity score-matched cohort based on demographics, socioeconomic status (income based), clinical comorbidities, including drug and alcohol use, STEMI acuity (cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock), and hospital characteristics. A total of 42 645 and 171 545 STEMI hospitalizations were identified as having Medicaid and private insurance, respectively. In unadjusted analyses, Medicaid beneficiaries with STEMI had lower rates of coronary revascularization (88.9% versus 92.3%; odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.65-0.70) and higher rates of in-hospital mortality (4.9% versus 2.8%; odds ratio, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.72-1.91) compared with privately insured individuals ( P<0.001 for both). In propensity-matched cohort of 40 870 hospitalizations per group, similar results for lower rates of revascularization (89.1% versus 91.1%; odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.76-0.84) and higher in-hospital mortality (4.9% versus 3.7%; odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.26-1.45) were observed in Medicaid compared with private insurance, despite extensive matching ( P<0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid beneficiaries with STEMI had lower rates of revascularization, although small absolute difference, and higher in-hospital mortality compared with privately insured individuals. Further studies are needed to identify and understand the variation in STEMI outcomes by insurance status.