Clinical and economic burden of comorbid coronary artery disease in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: sex differences in a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a common comorbidity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, data related to the impact of CAD on outcomes of acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) are limited and whether the relationship depends on sex remains unknown. Our aim was to determine the impact of comorbid CAD on clinical outcomes among men and women with AECOPD. METHODS: We used data from the acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease inpatient registry (ACURE) study, which is a nationwide observational real-world study conducted between September 2017 and February 2020 at 163 centers in patients admitted with AECOPD as their primary diagnosis. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of CAD in men and women. The primary outcomes were the length of hospital stay and economic burden during hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 3906 patients included in our study, the prevalence of CAD was 17.0%, and it was higher in women than in men (19.5% vs. 16.3%; P = 0.034). Age and other cardiovascular diseases were common factors associated with comorbid CAD in men and women, while body-mass index, cerebrovascular disease, and diabetes were determinants in men and pre-admission use of long-acting beta-adrenoceptor agonist and home oxygen therapy were protective factors in women. Only in men, patients with CAD had a longer length of hospital stay (median 10.0 vs. 9.0 days, P < 0.001), higher total cost during hospitalization (median $1502.2 vs. $1373.4, P < 0.001), and more severe COPD symptoms at day 30 compared to those without CAD. No significant difference was found in women. Comorbid CAD showed no relationship with 30-day readmission or death regardless of sex. In our real-world study, mortality/readmission risk within 30 days increased in patients with previous frequent hospitalizations and poorer pulmonary function. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized AECOPD patients, comorbid CAD was significantly associated with poorer short-term outcomes in men. Clinicians should have heightened attention for men with comorbid CAD to achieve an optimal management of AECOPD patients.

Cost-effectiveness of Cardiac Telerehabilitation With Relapse Prevention for the Treatment of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease in the Netherlands.

Importance: Cardiac telerehabilitation (CTR) has been found to be a safe and beneficial alternative to traditional center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) and might be associated with higher participation rates by reducing barriers to CR use. However, implementation of CTR interventions remains low, which may be owing to a lack of cost-effectiveness analyses of data from large-scale randomized clinical trials. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of CTR with relapse prevention compared with center-based CR among patients with coronary artery disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation performed a cost-utility analysis of data from the SmartCare-CAD (Effects of Cardiac Telerehabilitation in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Using a Personalized Patient-Centred ICT Platform) randomized clinical trial. The cost-effectiveness and utility of 3 months of cardiac telerehabilitation followed by 9 months of relapse prevention were compared with the cost-effectiveness of traditional center-based cardiac rehabilitation. The analysis included 300 patients with stable coronary artery disease who received care at a CR center serving 2 general hospitals in the Netherlands between May 23, 2016, and July 26, 2018. All patients were entering phase 2 of outpatient CR and were followed up for 1 year (until August 14, 2019). Data were analyzed from September 21, 2020, to September 24, 2021. Intervention: After baseline measurements were obtained, participants were randomly assigned on a 1:1 ratio to receive CTR (intervention group) or center-based CR (control group) using computerized block randomization. After 6 supervised center-based training sessions, patients in the intervention group continued training at home using a heart rate monitor and accelerometer. Patients uploaded heart rate and physical activity data and discussed their progress during a weekly video consultation with their physical therapist. After 3 months, weekly coaching was concluded, and on-demand coaching was initiated for relapse prevention; patients were instructed to continue using their wearable sensors and were contacted in cases of nonadherence to the intervention or reduced exercise or physical activity volumes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality-adjusted life-years were assessed using the EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level survey (EQ-5D-5L) and the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS), and cardiac-associated health care costs and non-health care costs were measured by health care consumption, productivity, and informal care questionnaires (the Medical Consumption Questionnaire, the Productivity Cost Questionnaire, and the Valuation of Informal Care Questionnaire) designed by the Institute for Medical Technology Assessment. Costs were converted to 2020 price levels (in euros) using the Dutch consumer price index (to convert to US dollars, euro values were multiplied by 1.142, which was the mean exchange rate in 2020). Results: Among 300 patients (266 men [88.7%]), the mean (SD) age was 60.7 (9.5) years. The quality of life among patients receiving CTR vs center-based CR was comparable during the study according to the results of both utility measures (mean difference on EQ-5D-5L: -0.004; P = .82; mean difference on EQ-VAS: -0.001; P = .92). Intervention costs were significantly higher for CTR (mean [SE], €224 [€4] [$256 ($4)]) compared with center-based CR (mean [SE], €156 [€5] [$178 ($6)]; P < .001); however, no difference in overall cardiac health care costs was observed between CTR (mean [SE], €4787 [€503] [$5467 ($574)] and center-based CR (mean [SE], €5507 [€659] [$6289 ($753)]; P = .36). From a societal perspective, CTR was associated with lower costs compared with center-based CR (mean [SE], €20 495 [€ 2751] [$23 405 ($3142)] vs €24 381 [€3613] [$27 843 ($4126)], respectively), although this difference was not statistically significant (-€3887 [-$4439]; P = .34). Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation, a CTR intervention with relapse prevention was likely to be cost-effective compared with center-based CR, suggesting that CTR maybe used as an alternative intervention for the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease. These results add to the evidence base in favor of CTR and may increase the implementation of CTR interventions in clinical practice.

The effects of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein on the clinical outcomes in obstructive sleep apnea patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP), and their respective impact on the clinical outcomes in patients undergoing off-pump cardiac artery bypass grafting (OPCABG). METHODS: We enrolled consecutive eligible patients listed for elective OPCABG who underwent cardiorespiratory polygraphy before surgery between January 2019 and December 2019 in this prospective observational single-center study. Baseline, intraoperative, and postoperative clinical data were compared between absent-mild and moderate-severe OSA groups. Regression analysis investigated the relationship between Hs-CRP level and severity of OSA, and further assessed the factors influencing postoperative atrial fibrillation, duration of hospitalization, and hospital cost. RESULTS: Patients with moderate-severe OSA accounted for 42.3% (52/123) of the cohort. Partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2), Hs-CRP, apnea hypopnea index (AHI), mean apnea time, maximum apnea time, and oxygen desaturation index ODI ≥ 3% were significantly higher in the moderate-severe OSA group than in the absent-mild OSA group. Left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF), lowest arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), and mean SaO2 were significantly lower in the moderate-severe OSA group. Moderate-severe OSA was associated with elevated Hs-CRP level (OR = 2.356, 95% CI 1.101-5.041, P = 0.027). Hs-CRP was an independent risk factor for post-CABG atrial fibrillation (POAF) (OR = 1.212, P = 0.01). Hs-CRP level independently correlated with duration of hospitalization (B = 0.456, P = 0.001) and hospital cost (B = 1.111, P = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Hs-CRP level was closely related to OSA severity and have potential utility in predicting POAF, duration of hospitalization, and hospital costs in patients undergoing OPCABG.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ankle-brachial index screening in patients with coronary artery disease to optimize medical management.

INTRODUCTION: Screening for peripheral artery disease (PAD) with the ankle-brachial index (ABI) test is currently not recommended in the general population; however, previous studies advocate screening in high-risk populations. Although providers may be hesitant to prescribe low-dose rivaroxaban to patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) alone, given the reduction in cardiovascular events and death associated with rivaroxaban, screening for PAD with the ABI test and accordingly prescribing rivaroxaban may provide additional benefits. We sought to describe the cost-effectiveness of screening for PAD in patients with CAD to optimize this high-risk populations' medical management. METHODS: We used a Markov model to evaluate the ABI test in patients with CAD. We assumed that all patients screened would be candidates for low-dose rivaroxaban. We assessed the cost of ABI screening at $100 per patient and added additional charges for physician visits ($100) and rivaroxaban cost ($470 per month). We used a 30-day cycle and performed analysis over 35 years. We evaluated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from previous studies and determined the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) according to our model. We performed a deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses of variables with uncertainty and reported them in a Tornado diagram showing the variables with the greatest effect on the ICER. RESULTS: Our model estimates decision costs to screen or not screen at $94,953 and $82,553, respectively. The QALYs gained from screening was 0.060, generating an ICER of $207,491 per QALY. Factors most influential on the ICER were the reduction in all-cause mortality associated with rivaroxaban and the prohibitively high cost of rivaroxaban. If rivaroxaban cost less than $95 per month, this would make screening cost-effective based on a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: According to our model, screening patients with CAD for PAD to start low-dose rivaroxaban is not currently cost-effective due to insufficient reduction in all-cause mortality and high medication costs. Nevertheless, vascular surgeons have a unique opportunity to prescribe or advocate for low-dose rivaroxaban in patients with PAD to improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of screening of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 DIABetes at a very high cardiovascular risk (SCADIAB study) rational and design.

BACKGROUND: Screening for coronary artery disease (CAD) remains broadly performed in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), although the lack of evidence. We conduct a real-world evidence (RWE) study to assess the risk of major clinical outcomes and economic impact of routine CAD screening in T2DM individuals at a very high cardiovascular risk. METHODS: SCADIAB is a comparative nationwide cohort study using data from the French National Health Data System. The main inclusion criteria are: age ≥ 40 years, DT2 diagnosed for ≥ 7 years, with ≥ 2 additional cardiovascular risk factors plus a history of microvascular or macrovascular disease, except CAD. We estimated ≥ 90,000 eligible participants for our study. Data will be extracted from 01/01/2008 to 31/12/2019. Eligible participants will be identified during a first 7-year selection period (2008-2015). Each participant will be assigned either in experimental (CAD screening procedure during the selection period) or control group (no CAD screening) on 01/01/2015, and followed for 5 years. The primary endpoint is the incremental cost per life year saved over 5 years in CAD screening group versus no CAD screening. The main secondary endpoints are: total 5-year direct costs of each strategy; incidence of major cardiovascular (acute coronary syndrome, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary revascularization or all-cause death), cerebrovascular (hospitalization for transient ischemic attack, stroke, or carotid revascularization) and lower-limb events (peripheral artery disease, ischemic diabetic foot, lower-limb revascularization or amputation); and the budget impact for the French Insurance system to promote the cost-effective strategy. Analyses will be adjusted for a high-dimension propensity score taking into account known and unknown confounders. SCADIAB has been funded by the French Ministry of Health and the protocol has been approved by the French ethic authorities. Data management and analyses will start in the second half of 2021. DISCUSSION: SCADIAB is a large and contemporary RWE study that will assess the economic and clinical impacts of routine CAD screening in T2DM people at a very high cardiovascular risk. It will also evaluate the clinical practice regarding CAD screening and help to make future recommendations and optimize the use of health care resources. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04534530 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04534530 ).

Clinical and Economic Outcomes Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and/or Peripheral Artery Disease.

To address literature gaps on treatment with real-world evidence, this study compared effectiveness, safety, and cost outcomes in NVAF patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease (CAD, PAD) prescribed apixaban versus other oral anticoagulants. NVAF patients aged ≥65 years co-diagnosed with CAD/PAD initiating warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban were selected from the US Medicare population (January 1, 2013 to September 30, 2015). Propensity score matching was used to match apixaban versus warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban cohorts. Cox models were used to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), all-cause mortality, and a composite of stroke/myocardial infarction/all-cause mortality. Generalized linear and two-part models were used to compare stroke/SE, MB, and all-cause costs between cohorts. A total of 33,269 warfarin-apixaban, 9,335 dabigatran-apixaban, and 33,633 rivaroxaban-apixaban pairs were identified after matching. Compared with apixaban, stroke/SE risk was higher in warfarin (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.61 to 2.31), dabigatran (HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.18 to 2.43), and rivaroxaban (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.51) patients. MB risk was higher in warfarin (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.52 to 1.83), dabigatran (HR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.68), and rivaroxaban (HR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.71 to 2.05) patients vs apixaban. Stroke/SE- and MB-related medical costs per-patient per-month were higher in warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban patients versus apixaban. Total all-cause health care costs were higher in warfarin and rivaroxaban patients compared with apixaban patients. In conclusion, compared with apixaban, patients on dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin had a higher risk of stroke/SE, MB, and event-related costs.

Differences in High- and Low-Value Cardiovascular Testing by Health Insurance Provider.

Background Quality of care incentives and reimbursements for cardiovascular testing differ between insurance providers. We hypothesized that there are differences in the use of guideline-concordant testing between Medicaid versus commercial insurance patients <65 years, and between Medicare Advantage versus Medicare fee-for-service patients ≥65 years. Methods and Results Using data from the Colorado All-Payer Claims Database from 2015 to 2018, we identified patients eligible to receive a high-value test recommended by guidelines: assessment of left ventricular function among patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or incident heart failure, or a low-value test that provides minimal patient benefit: stress testing prior to low-risk surgery or routine stress testing within 2 years of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Among 145 616 eligible patients, 37% had fee-for-service Medicare, 18% Medicare Advantage, 22% Medicaid, and 23% commercial insurance. Using multilevel logistic regression models adjusted for patient characteristics, Medicaid patients were less likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR], 0.84 [0.73-0.98]; P=0.03) and heart failure (OR, 0.59 [0.51-0.70]; P<0.01) compared with commercially insured patients. Medicare Advantage patients were more likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (OR, 1.35 [1.15-1.59]; P<0.01) and less likely to receive low-value testing after percutaneous coronary intervention/ coronary artery bypass graft (OR, 0.63 [0.55-0.72]; P<0.01) compared with Medicare fee-for-service patients. Conclusions Guideline-concordant testing was less likely to occur among patients with Medicaid compared with commercial insurance, and more likely to occur among patients with Medicare Advantage compared with fee-for-service Medicare. Insurance plan features may provide valuable targets to improve guideline-concordant testing.

Combined stress myocardial CT perfusion and coronary CT angiography as a feasible strategy among patients presenting with acute chest pain to the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: A combined approach of myocardial CT perfusion (CTP) with coronary CT angiography (CTA) was shown to have better diagnostic accuracy than coronary CTA alone. However, data on cost benefits and length of stay when compared to other perfusion imaging modalities has not been evaluated. Therefore, we aim to perform a feasibility study to assess direct costs and length of stay of a combined stress CTP/CTA and use SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) as a benchmark, among chest pain patients at intermediate-risk for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This is a prospective two-arm clinical trial (NCT02538861) with 43 patients enrolled in stress CTP/CTA arm (General Electric Revolution CT) and 102 in SPECT-MPI arm. Mean age of the study population was 65 â€‹± â€‹12 years; 56% were men. We used multivariable linear regression analysis to compare length of stay and direct costs between the two modalities. RESULTS: Overall, 9 out of the 43 patients (21%) with CTP/CTA testing had an abnormal test. Of these 9 patients, 7 patients underwent invasive coronary angiography and 6 patients were found to have obstructive coronary artery disease. Normal CTP/CTA test was found in 34 patients (79%), who were discharged home and all patients were free of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days. The mean length of stay was significantly shorter by 28% (mean difference: 14.7 â€‹h; 95% CI: 0.7, 21) among stress CTP/CTA (20 â€‹h [IQR: 16, 37]) compared to SPECT-MPI (30 â€‹h [IQR: 19, 44.5]). Mean direct costs were significantly lower by 44% (mean difference: $1535; 95% CI: 987, 2082) among stress CTA/CTP ($1750 [IQR: 1474, 2114] compared to SPECT-MPI ($2837 [IQR: 2491, 3554]). CONCLUSION: Combined stress CTP/CTA is a feasible strategy for evaluation of chest pain patients presenting to ED at intermediate-risk for ACS and has the potential to lead to shorter length of stay and lower direct costs.

Preparing for Bundled Payments: Impact of Complications Post-Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting on Costs.

BACKGROUND: Bundled payments for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) provide a single reimbursement for care provided from admission through 90 days post-discharge. We aim to explore the impact of complications on total institutional costs, as well as the drivers of high costs for index hospitalization. METHODS: We linked clinical and internal cost data for patients undergoing CABG from 2014 to 2017 at a single institution. We compared unadjusted average variable direct costs, reporting excess cost from an uncomplicated baseline. We stratified by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons preoperative risk and quality outcome measures as well as value-based outcomes (readmission, post-acute care utilization). We performed multivariable linear regression to evaluate drivers of high costs, adjusting for preoperative and intraoperative characteristics and postoperative complications. RESULTS: We reviewed 1789 patients undergoing CABG with an average of 2.7 vessels (SD 0.89). A significant proportion of patients were diabetic (51.2%) and obese (mean body mass index 30.6, SD 6.1). Factors associated with increased adjusted costs were preoperative renal failure (P = .001), diabetes (P = .001) and body mass index (P = .05), and postoperative stroke (P < .001), prolonged ventilation (P < .001), rebleeding requiring reoperation (P < .001) and renal failure (P < .001) with varying magnitude. Preoperative ejection fraction and insurance status were not associated with increased adjusted costs. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative characteristics had less of an impact on costs post-CABG than postoperative complications. Postoperative complications vary in their impact on internal costs, with reoperation, stroke, and renal failure having the greatest impact. In preparation for bundled payments, hospitals should focus on understanding and preventing drivers of high cost.

Cost-Effectiveness of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Diagnosing Coronary Artery Disease in the Australian Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a major public health problem in Australia and globally. A variety of imaging techniques allow for both anatomical and functional assessment of CAD and selection of the optimal investigation pathway is challenging. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is not widely used in Australia, partly due to perceived cost and lack of Federal Government reimbursement compared to the alternative techniques. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of different diagnostic strategies in identifying significant CAD in patients with chest pain suggestive of angina using the evidence gathered in the Clinical Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Coronary Heart Disease 2 (CE-MARC trial), analysed from the Australian health care perspective. METHODS: A decision analytic model coupled with three distinct Markov models allowed eight potential clinical investigation strategies to be considered; combinations of exercise electrocardiogram stress testing (EST), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), stress CMR, and invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Costs were from the Australian health care system in Australian dollars, and outcomes were measured in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. Parameter estimates were derived from the CE-MARC and EUropean trial on Reduction Of cardiac events with Perindopril in patients with stable coronary Artery disease (EUROPA) trials, and from reviews of the published literature. RESULTS: The most cost-effective diagnostic strategy, based on a cost-effectiveness threshold of $45,000 to $75,000 per QALY gained, was EST, followed by stress CMR if the EST was positive or inconclusive, followed by ICA if the stress CMR was positive or inconclusive; this held true in the base case and the majority of scenario analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This economic evaluation shows that an investigative strategy of stress CMR if EST is inconclusive or positive is the most cost-effective approach for diagnosing significant coronary disease in chest pain patients within the Australian health care system.

Coronary risk of patients with valvular heart disease: prospective validation of CT-Valve Score.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively validate the CT-Valve score, a new risk score designed to identify patients with valvular heart disease at a low risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) who could benefit from multislice CT (MSCT) first instead of coronary angiography (CAG). METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients referred for valve surgery in the Capital Region of Denmark and Odense University Hospital from the 1 February 2015 to the 1 February 2017. MSCT was implemented for patients with a CT-Valve score ≤7 at the referring physician's discretion. Patients with a history of CAD or chronic kidney disease were excluded. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients needing reevaluation with CAG after MSCT and risk of CAD among the patients determined to be low to intermediate risk. RESULTS: In total, 1149 patients were included. The median score was 9 (IQR 3) and 339 (30%) had a score ≤7. MSCT was used for 117 patients. Of these 29 (25%) were reevaluated and 9 (7.7%) had CAD. Of the 222 patients with a score ≤7 that did not receive an MSCT, 14 (6%) had significant CAD. The estimated total cost of evaluation among patients with a score ≤7 before implementation was €132 093 compared with €79 073 after, a 40% reduction. Similarly, estimated total radiation before and after was 608 mSv and 362 mSv, a 41% reduction. Follow-up at a median of 32 months (18-48) showed no ischaemic events for patients receiving only MSCT. CONCLUSION: The CT-Valve score is a valid method for determining risk of CAD among patients with valvular heart disease. Using a score ≤7 as a cut-off for the use of MSCT is safe and cost-effective.

Impact of Medicare's Bundled Payments Initiative on Patient Selection, Payments, and Outcomes for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

BACKGROUND: The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation launched the Bundled Payments for Care Initiative (BPCI) in 2013. Its effect on payments and outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used Medicare inpatient files to identify index admissions for PCI and CABG from 2013 through 2016 at BPCI hospitals and matched control hospitals and difference in differences models to compare the 2 groups. Our primary outcome was the change in standardized Medicare-allowed payments per 90-day episode. Secondary outcomes included changes in patient selection, discharge to postacute care, length of stay, emergency department use, readmissions, and mortality. Forty-two hospitals joined BPCI for PCI and 46 for CABG. There were no differential changes in patient selection between BPCI and control hospitals. Baseline Medicare payments per episode for PCI were $20 164 at BPCI hospitals and $19 955 at control hospitals. For PCI, payments increased at both BPCI and control hospitals during the intervention period, such that there was no significant difference in differences (BPCI hospitals +$673, P=0.048; control hospitals +$551, P=0.022; difference in differences $122, P=0.768). For CABG, payments at both BPCI and control hospitals decreased during the intervention period (BPCI baseline, $36 925, change -$2918, P<0.001; control baseline, $36 877, change -$2618, P<0.001; difference in differences, $300; P=0.730). For both PCI and CABG, BPCI participation was not associated with changes in mortality, readmissions, or length of stay. Among BPCI hospitals, emergency department use differentially increased for patients undergoing PCI and decreased for patients undergoing CABG. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in episode-based payment for PCI and CABG was not associated with changes in patient selection, payments, length of stay, or clinical outcomes.

Is the Use of BIMA in CABG Sub-Optimal? A Review of the Current Clinical and Economic Evidence Including Innovative Approaches to the Management of Mediastinitis.

Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has traditionally been limited. This review looks at the recent outcome data on BIMA in CABG focusing on the management of risk factors for mediastinitis, one of the potential barriers for more extensive BIMA utilization. A combination of pre-, intra- and postoperative strategies are essential to reduce mediastinitis. Limited data indicate that the incidence of mediastinitis can be reduced using closed incision negative-pressure wound therapy as a part of these strategies with the possibility of offering patients best treatment options by extending BIMA to those with a higher risk of mediastinitis. Recent economic data imply that the technology may challenge the current low uptake of BIMA by reducing the short-term cost differentials between single internal mammary artery and BIMA. Given that most published randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of observational long-term outcome data favor BIMA, if short-term complications of BIMA including mediastinitis can be controlled adequately, there may be opportunities for more extensive use of BIMA leading to improved long-term outcomes. An ongoing study looking at BIMA in high-risk patients may provide evidence to support the hypothesis that mediastinitis should not be a factor in limiting the use of BIMA in CABG.

Causes of death among Federal Black Lung Benefits Program beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare, 1999-2016.

BACKGROUND: Coal miners with totally disabling pneumoconiosis are eligible for benefits through the Federal Black Lung Benefits Program (FBLP). We identify the causes of death among Medicare beneficiaries with a claim for which the FBLP was the primary payer and compare these causes of death to all deceased Medicare beneficiaries to better understand elevated death and disease among miners with occupational respiratory exposures. METHODS: From 1999 to 2016 Medicare data, we extracted beneficiary and National Death Index data for 28,003 beneficiaries with an FBLP primary payer claim. We summarized the International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification 10th revision-coded underlying causes of death and entity-axis multiple causes of death for 22,242 deceased Medicare beneficiaries with an FBLP primary payer Medicare claim and compared their causes of death to the deceased Medicare beneficiary population. RESULTS: Among deceased FBLP beneficiaries, the three leading underlying causes of death were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, unspecified (J44.9, 10.1%), atherosclerotic heart disease (I25.1, 9.3%), and coal workers' pneumoconiosis (CWP) (J60, 9.2%). All diseases of the respiratory system combined (J00-J99) were the underlying cause of death for 29.1% of all beneficiaries, with pneumoconioses (J60-J64) as the underlying cause for 11.0% of all beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: Coal miners enrolled in Medicare with an FBLP primary payer claim were more likely to have specific respiratory and cardiovascular diseases listed as a cause of death than deceased Medicare beneficiaries overall, and were also more likely to die from CWP or any pneumoconioses.

Hospital costs and prognosis in end-stage renal disease patients receiving coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is common in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Patients with ESRD are a high-risk group for cardiac surgery and have increased morbidity and mortality. Most studies comparing ESRD patients receiving coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention have found that the long-term survival is good in ESRD patients after CABG. The aim of our study was to compare ESRD patients who underwent CABG with the general population who underwent CABG, in terms of prognosis and hospital costs. METHODS: This study analyzed data from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan for patients who were diagnosed with ESRD and received CABG (ICD-9-CM codes 585 or 586) between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2009. The ESRD patients included in this study all received catastrophic illness cards with the major illness listed as ESRD from the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan. The control subjects were randomly selected patients without ESRD after propensity score matching with ESRD patients according to age, gender, and comorbidities at a 2:1 ratio from the same dataset. RESULTS: A total of 48 ESRD patients received CABG, and their mean age was 62.04 ± 10.04 years. Of these patients, 29.2% were aged ≥70 years, and 66.7% were male. ESRD patients had marginally higher intensive care unit (ICU) stays (11.06 vs 7.24 days) and significantly higher ICU costs (28,750 vs 17,990 New Taiwan Dollars (NTD)) than non-ESRD patients. Similarly, ESRD patients had significantly higher surgical costs (565,200 vs. 421,890 NTD), a higher perioperative mortality proportion (10.4% vs 2.1%) and a higher postoperative mortality proportion (33.3% vs 11.5%) than non-ESRD patients. CONCLUSIONS: After CABG, ESRD patients had a higher risk of mortality than non-ESRD patients, and ICU and surgery costs were also higher among the ESRD patients than among patients without ESRD.

Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary and Peripheral Artery Disease Antithrombotic Treatments in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, 15-20% of individuals with coronary artery disease (chronic coronary syndrome [CCS]) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) receiving routine treatment experience cardiovascular events (CVEs) within 3-4 years. Using PICOSTEPS (Patients-Intervention-Comparators-Outcomes-Setting-Time-Effects-Perspective-Sensitivity analysis) reporting, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of recently approved rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily in combination with acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg daily (RIV + ASA) for the prevention of CVEs among Finns with CCS or symptomatic PAD. METHODS: Myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, acute limb ischemia, amputations, major extracranial bleeding, venous thromboembolism, and cardiovascular deaths were modeled in a Markov model examining a cohort of patients with CCS or symptomatic PAD. Relative effects of the intervention (RIV + ASA) and comparator (ASA) were based on the COMPASS trial. The primary outcome was 3%/year discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as cost (2019 euros) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in the Finnish setting over a lifetime horizon. In addition to nonfatal and fatal CVEs, the effects factored Finnish non-CVE mortality, quality of life, and direct costs from a public payer perspective. Disaggregated costs and QALYs, costs per life year gained (LYG), and ischemic strokes avoided, net monetary benefit (NMB), expected value of perfect information (EVPI), economic value-added (EVA), cost-effectiveness table, and acceptability frontier were examined. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In the deterministic comparison with ASA over a lifetime horizon, RIV + ASA resulted in a benefit of 0.404 QALYs and 0.474 LYGs for an additional cost of €3241, resulting in an ICER of €8031/QALY. The probabilistic ICER was €4313/QALY (EVPI €1829/patient). RIV + ASA had positive NMB (€8791/patient), low EVPI (€88/patient), high EVA (€8703/patient), and 91% probability of cost-effectiveness using the willingness-to-pay of €25,254/QALY. The primary result was conservative and robust for RIV + ASA. CONCLUSION: RIV + ASA was a cost-effective treatment alternative compared with ASA in patients with CCS or symptomatic PAD in Finland.

Finland lacks published evidence on the cost-effectiveness of approved interventions for the prevention of cardiovascular events among individuals with chronic coronary syndrome (stable coronary artery disease) or symptomatic peripheral artery disease at risk of cardiovascular complications. Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg once daily is indicated and reimbursed in Finland for the prevention of cardiovascular events for patients with stable coronary artery disease or symptomatic peripheral artery disease. We assessed the effectiveness and costs of treatment with rivaroxaban plus acetylsalicylic acid in comparison with treatment with acetylsalicylic acid. That is, we examined whether rivaroxaban is cost-effective when prescribed in combination with acetylsalicylic acid.Cardiovascular events with their associated costs and impact on quality of life were modeled over the lifetime of patients. The main effectiveness outcome was quality-adjusted life years (modeled survival multiplied by the expected quality of life), and costs included those relevant to the Finnish public payer in 2019. Extensive sensitivity analyses were carried out to evaluate the impacts of different model inputs and rationale.Rivaroxaban plus acetylsalicylic acid had high probability of being cost-effective, compared with acetylsalicylic acid. By valuing quality-of-life benefit with a plausible willingness-to-pay, net cost savings of €8791 per patient could be gained or economic value added by €8703 per patient if rivaroxaban was used.

Are cost advantages from a modern Indian hospital transferable to the United States?

BACKGROUND: Multiple modern Indian hospitals operate at very low cost while meeting US-equivalent quality accreditation standards. Though US hospitals face intensifying pressure to lower their cost, including proposals to extend Medicare payment rates to all admissions, the transferability of Indian hospitals' cost advantages to US peers remains unclear. METHODS: Using time-driven activity-based costing methods, we estimate the average cost of personnel and space for an elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery at two American hospitals and one Indian hospital (NH). All three hospitals are Joint Commission accredited and have reputations for use of modern performance management methods. Our case study applies several analytic steps to distinguish transferable from non-transferable sources of NH's cost savings. RESULTS: After removing non-transferable sources of efficiency, NH's residual cost advantage primarily rests on shifting tasks to less-credentialed and/or less-experienced personnel who are supervised by highly-skilled personnel when perceived risk of complications is low. NH's high annual CABG volume facilitates such supervised work "downshifting." The study is subject to limitations inherent in case studies, does not account for the younger age of NH's patients, or capture savings attributable to NH's negligible frequency of re-admission or post-acute care facility placement. CONCLUSIONS: Most transferable bases for a modern Indian hospital's cost advantage would require more flexible American states' hospital and health professional licensing regulations, greater family participation in inpatient care, and stronger support by hospital executives and clinicians for substantially lowering the cost of care via regionalization of complex surgeries and weekend use of costly operating rooms.

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.