Socioeconomic status as a predictor of post-operative mortality and outcomes in carotid artery stenting vs. carotid endarterectomy.

Background: The association between low socioeconomic status (SES) and worse surgical outcomes has become an emerging area of interest. Literature has demonstrated that carotid artery stenting (CAS) poses greater risk of postoperative complications, particularly stroke, than carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This study aims to compare the impact of low SES on patients undergoing CAS vs. CEA. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for patients undergoing CAS and CEA from 2010 to 2015. Patients were stratified by highest and lowest median income quartiles by zip code and compared through demographics, hospital characteristics, and comorbidities defined by the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury (AKI), post-operative stroke, sepsis, and bleeding requiring reoperation.Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the effect of SES on outcomes. Results: Five thousand four hundred twenty-five patients underwent CAS (Low SES: 3,516 (64.8%); High SES: 1,909 (35.2%) and 38,399 patients underwent CEA (Low SES: 22,852 (59.5%); High SES: 15,547 (40.5%). Low SES was a significant independent predictor of mortality [OR = 2.07 (1.25-3.53); p = 0.005] for CEA patients, but not for CAS patients [OR = 1.21 (CI 0.51-2.30); p = 0.68]. Stroke was strongly associated with low SES, CEA patients (Low SES = 1.5% vs. High SES = 1.2%; p = 0.03), while bleeding was with high SES, CAS patients (Low SES = 5.3% vs. High SES = 7.1%; p = 0.01). CCI was a strong predictor of mortality for both procedures [CAS: OR1.45 (1.17-1.80); p < 0.001. CEA: OR1.60 (1.45-1.77); p < 0.001]. Advanced age was a predictor of mortality post-CEA [OR = 1.03 (1.01-1.06); p = 0.01]. While not statistically significant, advanced age and increased mortality trended towards a positive association in CAS [OR = 1.05 (1.00-1.10); p = 0.05]. Conclusions: Low SES is a significant independent predictor of post-operative mortality in patients who underwent CEA, but not CAS. CEA is also associated with higher incidence of stroke in low SES patients. Findings demonstrate the impact of SES on outcomes for patients undergoing carotid revascularization procedures. Prospective studies are warranted to further evaluate this disparity.

Minimally invasive approach associated with lower resource utilization after aortic and mitral valve surgery.

Objective: To investigate the effect of minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) on resource utilization, cost, and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing left-heart valve operations. Methods: Data were retrospectively reviewed for patients undergoing single-valve surgery (eg, aortic valve replacement, mitral valve replacement, or mitral valve repair) at a single center from 2018 to 2021, stratified by surgical approach: MICS vs full sternotomy (FS). Baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were compared. Primary outcome was high resource utilization, defined as direct procedure cost higher than the third quartile or either postoperative LOS ≥7 days or 30-day readmission. Secondary outcomes were direct cost, length of stay, 30-day readmission, in-hospital and 30-day mortality, and major morbidity. Multiple regression analysis was conducted, controlling for baseline characteristics, operative approach, valve operation, and lead surgeon to assess high resource utilization. Results: MICS was correlated with a significantly lower rate of high resource utilization (MICS, 31.25% [n = 115] vs FS 61.29% [n = 76]; P < .001). Median postoperative length of stay (MICS, 4 days [range, 3-6 days] vs FS, 6 days [range, 4 to 9 days]; P < .001) and direct cost (MICS, $22,900 [$19,500-$28,600] vs FS, $31,900 [$25,900-$50,000]; P < .001) were lower in the MICS group. FS patients were more likely to experience postoperative atrial fibrillation (P = .040) and renal failure (P = .027). Other outcomes did not differ between groups. Controlling for stratified Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality, cardiac valve operation, and lead surgeon, FS demonstrated increased likelihood of high resource utilization (P < .001). Conclusions: MICS for left-heart valve pathology demonstrated improved postoperative outcomes and resource utilization.

Outcomes of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement in patients with obese body mass indices.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive heart valve surgery has previously been shown to be safe and feasible in obese patients. Within this population, we investigated the effect of obesity class on the patient outcomes of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (mini-AVR). METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with obese body mass indices (BMIs) who underwent mini-AVR between 2012 and 2020. Patients were stratified into three groups according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention adult obesity classifications: Class I (BMI: 30.0-<35.0), Class II (BMI: 35.0-<40.0), and Class III (BMI ≥ 40.0). The primary outcomes were postoperative length of stay (LOS), 30-day mortality, and direct cost. RESULTS: Among 206 obese patients who underwent mini-AVR, LOS (Class I 5 [3-7] vs. Class II 6 [5-7] vs. Class III 6 [5-7] days; p = .056), postoperative 30-day mortality (Class I 2.44% [n = 3] vs. Class II 4.44% [n = 2] vs. Class III 7.89% [n = 3]; p = .200), and costs (Class I $24,118 [$20,237-$29.591] vs. Class II $22,215 [$18,492-$28,975] vs. Class III $24,810 [$20,245-$32,942] USD; p = .683) did not differ between obesity class cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Mini-AVR is safe and feasible to perform for obese patients regardless of their obesity class. Patients with obesity should be afforded the option of minimally invasive aortic valve surgery regardless of their obesity class.