Insurance-Based Disparities in Outcomes and ECMO Utilization for Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine insurance-based disparities in mortality, non-home discharges, and ECMO utilization in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Using a national database of U.S. academic medical centers and their affiliated hospitals, the risk-adjusted association between mortality, non-home discharge, and ECMO utilization and (1) the type of insurance coverage (private insurance, Medicare, dual enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid, and no insurance) and (2) the weekly hospital COVID-19 burden (0-5.0%; 5.1-10%, 10.1-20%, 20.1-30%, 30.1%-) was evaluated. Modelling was expanded to include an interaction between payer status and the weekly hospital COVID-19 burden to examine whether the lack of private insurance was associated with increases in disparities as the COVID-19 burden increased. RESULTS: Among 760,846 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 214,992 had private insurance, 318,624 had Medicare, 96,192 were dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, 107,548 had Medicaid, and 23,560 had no insurance. Overall, 76,250 died, 211,702 had non-home discharges, 75,703 were mechanically ventilated, and 2,642 underwent ECMO. The adjusted odds of death were higher in patients with Medicare (aOR 1.28; [95% CI: 1.21, 1.35]; P<0.0005), dually enrolled (aOR, 1.39; [1.30, 1.50]; P<0.0005), Medicaid (aOR, 1.28; [1.20, 1.36]; P<0.0005), and no insurance (aOR, 1.43; [1.26, 1.62]; P<0.0005) compared to patients with private insurance. Patients with Medicare (aOR, 0.47; [CI: 0.39, 0.58]; P <0.0005), dually enrolled (aOR, 0.32; [0.24, 0.43]; P<0.0005), Medicaid (aOR, 0.70; [ 0.62, 0.79]; P<0.0005), and no insurance (aOR, 0.40; [0.29, 0.56]; P<0.001] were less likely to be placed on ECMO than patients with private insurance. Mortality, non-home discharges, and ECMO utilization did not change significantly more in patients with private insurance compared to patients without private insurance as the COVID-19 burden increased. CONCLUSION: Among patients with COVID-19, insurance-based disparities in mortality, non-home discharges, and ECMO utilization were substantial, but these disparities did not increase as the hospital COVID-19 burden increased.

Less Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Is Safe and Feasible in Patients With Smaller Body Surface Area.

OBJECTIVE: Smaller body surface area (BSA) frequently precludes patients from left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy. We sought to investigate the clinical outcomes in patients with small BSA undergoing less invasive LVAD implantation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 216 patients implanted with HeartMate 3 LVAD (Abbott, Chicago, IL) via less invasive surgery at our institution. Patients were dichotomized based on their preimplant BSA for comparison between small BSA (≤1.8 m2) and normal/large BSA (>1.8 m2). We analyzed patient perioperative characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: In our study, small BSA was found in 32 patients (14.8%), while 184 patients (85.2%) had normal/large BSA. Women were more prevalent in the small BSA group (50.0% vs 13.0%, P < 0.001). Preoperative and intraoperative data showed comparable results. Major complications and hospital length of stay did not differ by BSA group. Patients with smaller BSA had significantly decreased pump parameters at discharge, including LVAD flow (4.11 ± 0.49 vs 4.60 ± 0.54 L/min, P < 0.001) and pump speed (5,200 vs 5,400 rpm, P < 0.001). Survival to discharge and within 6 months after implantation were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results suggest that less invasive HeartMate 3 implantation can be safely performed and demonstrates equivalent outcomes in patients with smaller body habitus. Randomized trials are required to confirm our data.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Access to Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery.

Importance: Whether people from racial and ethnic minority groups experience disparities in access to minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) is not known. Objective: To investigate racial and ethnic disparities in the utilization of MIMVS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database for patients who underwent mitral valve surgery between 2014 and 2019. Statistical analysis was performed from January 24 to August 11, 2022. Exposures: Patients were categorized as non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic individuals. Main Outcomes and Measures: The association between MIMVS (vs full sternotomy) and race and ethnicity were evaluated using logistic regression. Results: Among the 103 753 patients undergoing mitral valve surgery (mean [SD] age, 62 [13] years; 47 886 female individuals [46.2%]), 10 404 (10.0%) were non-Hispanic Black individuals, 89 013 (85.8%) were non-Hispanic White individuals, and 4336 (4.2%) were Hispanic individuals. Non-Hispanic Black individuals were more likely to have Medicaid insurance (odds ratio [OR], 2.21; 95% CI, 1.64-2.98; P < .001) and to receive care from a low-volume surgeon (OR, 4.45; 95% CI, 4.01-4.93; P < .001) compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Non-Hispanic Black individuals were less likely to undergo MIMVS (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.58-0.73; P < .001), whereas Hispanic individuals were not less likely to undergo MIMVS compared with non-Hispanic White individuals (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.67-1.75; P = .74). Patients with commercial insurance had 2.35-fold higher odds of undergoing MIMVS (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.06-2.68; P < .001) than those with Medicaid insurance. Patients operated by very-high volume surgeons (300 or more cases) had 20.7-fold higher odds (OR, 20.70; 95% CI, 12.7-33.9; P < .001) of undergoing MIMVS compared with patients treated by low-volume surgeons (less than 20 cases). After adjusting for patient risk, non-Hispanic Black individuals were still less likely to undergo MIMVS (adjusted OR [aOR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99; P = .04) and were more likely to die or experience a major complication (aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16-1.35; P < .001) compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to undergo MIMVS and more likely to die or experience a major complication than non-Hispanic White patients. These findings suggest that efforts to reduce inequity in cardiovascular medicine may need to include increasing access to private insurance and high-volume surgeons.

Anesthetic Management and Considerations for Electrophysiology Procedures.

The number of electrophysiology (EP) procedures being performed has dramatically increased in recent years. This escalation necessitates a full understanding by the general anesthesiologist as to the risks, specific considerations, and comorbidities that accompany these now common procedures. Procedures reviewed in this article include atrial fibrillation and flutter ablation, supraventricular tachycardia ablation, ventricular tachycardia ablation, electrical cardioversion, pacemaker insertion, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) insertion, and ICD lead extraction. General anesthetic considerations as well as procedure-specific concerns are discussed. Knowledge of these procedures will add to the anesthesiologist's armamentarium in safely caring for patients in the EP laboratory.

Update on Applications and Limitations of Perioperative Tranexamic Acid.

Tranexamic acid (TXA) is a potent antifibrinolytic with documented efficacy in reducing blood loss and allogeneic red blood cell transfusion in several clinical settings. With a growing emphasis on patient blood management, TXA has become an integral aspect of perioperative blood conservation strategies. While clinical applications of TXA in the perioperative period are expanding, routine use in select clinical scenarios should be supported by evidence for efficacy. Furthermore, questions regarding optimal dosing without increased risk of adverse events such as thrombosis or seizures should be answered. Therefore, ongoing investigations into TXA utilization in cardiac surgery, obstetrics, acute trauma, orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, pediatric surgery, and other perioperative settings continue. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the current applications and limitations of TXA use in the perioperative period.

Levels of Evidence Supporting the North American and European Perioperative Care Guidelines for Anesthesiologists between 2010 and 2020: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Although there are thousands of published recommendations in anesthesiology clinical practice guidelines, the extent to which these are supported by high levels of evidence is not known. This study hypothesized that most recommendations in clinical practice guidelines are supported by a low level of evidence. METHODS: A registered (Prospero CRD42020202932) systematic review was conducted of anesthesia evidence-based recommendations from the major North American and European anesthesiology societies between January 2010 and September 2020 in PubMed and EMBASE. The level of evidence A, B, or C and the strength of recommendation (strong or weak) for each recommendation was mapped using the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification system or the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The outcome of interest was the proportion of recommendations supported by levels of evidence A, B, and C. Changes in the level of evidence over time were examined. Risk of bias was assessed using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. RESULTS: In total, 60 guidelines comprising 2,280 recommendations were reviewed. Level of evidence A supported 16% (363 of 2,280) of total recommendations and 19% (288 of 1,506) of strong recommendations. Level of evidence C supported 51% (1,160 of 2,280) of all recommendations and 50% (756 of 1,506) of strong recommendations. Of all the guidelines, 73% (44 of 60) had a low risk of bias. The proportion of recommendations supported by level of evidence A versus level of evidence C (relative risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.18 to 4.74; P = 0.933) or level of evidence B versus level of evidence C (relative risk ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.72 to 3.72; P = 0.243) did not increase in guidelines that were revised. Year of publication was also not associated with increases in the proportion of recommendations supported by level of evidence A (relative risk ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.23; P = 0.340) or level of evidence B (relative risk ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.15; P = 0.283) compared to level of evidence C. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the recommendations in anesthesiology clinical practice guidelines are based on a low level of evidence, and this did not change over time. These findings highlight the need for additional efforts to increase the quality of evidence used to guide decision-making in anesthesiology.

Direct right ventricular Impella LD implantation enables postoperative ambulation and may avoid sternal re-entry.

Right ventricular assist devices (RVADs) typically require groin cannulation or sternal re-entry which can be avoided by direct pulmonary artery implantation with an Impella. We report the first use of the Impella LD as a directly implanted RVAD.