Rapid progression of carotid stenosis was rare in a large integrated healthcare system during an eight-year period.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have evaluated the rapid progression of carotid stenosis on a large scale. We created a custom software algorithm to analyze an electronic medical record database to examine the natural progression of carotid stenosis, identify a subset of patients with rapid progression, and evaluate the specific patient risk factors associated with this rapid progression. METHODS: Patients in a large integrated healthcare system who had undergone two or more carotid ultrasound scans from August 2010 to August 2018 were identified. We did not distinguish between those with an established carotid stenosis diagnosis and those with a screening ultrasound scan. We used our novel algorithm to extract data from their carotid ultrasound reports. The degrees of carotid stenosis were categorized as follows: level 1, 0% to 39%; level 2, 40% to 59%; level 3, 60% to 79%; level 4, 80% to 99%; and level 5, complete occlusion. The primary endpoint was rapid vs slow progression of carotid stenosis, with rapid progression defined as an increase of two or more levels within any 18-month period of the study, regardless of the date of the initial ultrasound scan. The association of the demographic and clinical characteristics with rapid progression was assessed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: From a cohort of 4.4 million patients, we identified 4982 patients with two or more carotid ultrasound scans and a median follow-up period of 13.1 months (range, 0.1-93.7 months). Of the 4982 patients, 879 (17.6%) had shown progression of carotid stenosis. Only 116 patients (2.3%) had had progression to level 4 (80%-99% stenosis) from any starting level during a median of 11.5 months. A total of 180 patients (3.6%) were identified as experiencing rapid progression during a median follow-up of 9.9 months. The final multivariable analysis showed that younger age (P < .01), white race (P = .02), lower body mass index (P = .01), a diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease (P = .03), and a diagnosis of transient ischemic attack (P < .01) were associated with rapid progression. CONCLUSIONS: Using a novel algorithm to extract data from >4 million patient records, we found that rapid progression of carotid stenosis appears to be rare. Although 17.6% of patients showed any degree of progression, only 3.6% had experienced rapid progression. Among those with any disease progression, 20.5% had experienced rapid progression. Although the overall incidence of rapid progression was low, patients with any progression might warrant close follow-up, especially if they have the associated risk factors for rapid progression. The custom software algorithm might be a powerful tool for creating and evaluating large datasets.

Financial viability of endovascular aortic repair in the modern era.

BACKGROUND: In the current era of cost containment, the financial impact of high-cost procedures such as endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remains an area of intensive interest. Previous reports suggested slim to negative operating margins with EVAR, prompting widespread initiatives to reduce cost and to improve reimbursement. In 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the reclassification of EVAR to more specific diagnosis-related group (DRG) coding and predicted an overall increase in hospital reimbursement. The potential impact of this change has not been described. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective EVAR at a single institution between January 2014 and December 2018 were identified retrospectively, then stratified by date. Group 1 patients underwent EVAR before DRG change in 2015 and were classified with DRG 237/238, major cardiovascular procedure. Group 2 patients underwent EVAR after the change and were classified as DRG 268/269, aortic/heart assist procedures. The total direct cost included implant cost, operating room (OR) labor, room and board, and other supply costs. Net revenue reflected real payer mix values without extrapolation based on standard Medicare rates. Hospital profit was defined as the contribution to indirect (CTI), subtracting total direct cost from net revenue. RESULTS: A total of 188 encounters were included, 67 (36%) in group 1 and 121 (64%) in group 2. Medicare patients composed 84% of group 1 and 81% of group 2. CTI (profit) increased by $4447 (+123%) from $3615 in group 1 to $8062 in group 2. Net revenue per encounter increased by $2054 (+7.1%). In group 1, the higher reimbursement DRG code 237 was applied in 5 of 67 (7.5%) patients, whereas DRG code 268 was assigned in 19 of 121 (15.1%) patients in group 2. Total direct cost per encounter decreased by $2012 (-7.9%). This decrease in cost was driven by a reduction in implant cost, from a mean $16,914 per encounter in group 1 to a mean $15,655 in group 2 (-$1259 or -7.4% per encounter) and by a decrease in OR labor cost, $2838 in group 1 to $2361 in group 2 (-$477 or -17.0% per encounter). CONCLUSIONS: A significant improvement in hospital CTI was observed for elective EVAR during the course of the study. The increased DRG reimbursement after the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services coding changes in 2015 was a major driver of this salutary change. Notably, efforts to reduce implant and OR cost as well as to improve coding and documentation accuracy over time had an equally important impact on financial return.

Analysis of emergency vascular surgery consults within a tertiary health care system.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with vascular disease often have multisystem atherosclerosis and multiple comorbidities requiring comprehensive interdisciplinary specialty care. Consultation is a critical component of a tertiary vascular surgery practice, but analysis of this service is under-reported in the literature. After-hours inpatient consultations and interhospital transfers are associated with urgent patient care. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of vascular surgery consultations was carried out from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2013. Consultations included inpatient services, the emergency department, surgical and medical intensive care unit, and interhospital transfers. Data analysis included number of consults, time of consultation (during hours, 0700-1859; after hours, 1900-0659), referring service, nature, and outcome of consultation. Consultations were then classified as urgent if vascular surgical intervention was required as an intraoperative consultation, within 24 hours, or during the same hospitalization. Patients without a same-hospital vascular surgical intervention were classified as nonurgent. RESULTS: During a 1-year period, 823 independent consult requests of 749 patients were analyzed. It was found that 57.8% of after-hours consults resulted in urgent patient care (P = .003); 29.7% of medicine, 33.3% of medical intensive care unit, 41.9% of trauma surgery, and 60% of emergency department after-hours consultations were urgent; 73% of surgery and 79.2% of interhospital after-hours consults required urgent vascular surgical intervention. Extremity ischemia, aortic disease, and iatrogenic consults accounted for 44.8%, 20.4%, and 11.1% of after-hours consults, with 57.9%, 56.4%, and 70% requiring urgent vascular surgical intervention, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After-hours consultations are not always associated with an urgent vascular surgical intervention. Nonurgent after-hours consultations are requested more frequently from some services and may present an opportunity for education that could improve workflow of the vascular workforce.