Tolat, Aneesh

AbstractBackgroundThe real‐world data on the safety profile of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) for infected cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) among elderly patients is not well‐established. This study aimed to evaluate the hospital outcomes between patients of different age groups who underwent TLE for infected CIED.MethodUsing the Nationwide Readmissions Database, our study included patients aged ≥18 years who underwent TLE for infected CIED between 2017 and 2020. We divided the patients into four groups: Group A. Young (<50 years), Group B. Young intermediate (50–69 years old), Group C. Older intermediate (70–79 years old), and Group D. Octogenarian (≥80 years old). We then analyzed the in‐hospital outcome and 30‐day readmission between these age groups.ResultsA total of 10,928 patients who were admitted for TLE of infected CIED were included in this study: 982 (9.0%) patients in group A, 4,234 (38.7%) patients in group B, 3,204 (29.3%) patients in group C and 2,508 (23.0%) of patients in group D. Our study demonstrated that the risk of early mortality increased with older age (Group B vs. Group A: OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.19‐3.09, p < .01; Group C vs. Group A: OR: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.51‐4.04, p < .01; Group D vs. Group A: OR: 2.82, 95% CI: 1.69‐4.72, p < .01). The risk of non‐home discharge also increased in elderly groups (Group B vs. Group A: OR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.52‐2.36; p < .01; Group C vs. Group A: OR: 2.82; 95% CI 2.24‐3.56; p < .01; Group D vs. Group A: OR: 4.16; 95% CI: 3.28‐5.28; p < .01). There was no significant difference in hospitalization length and 30‐day readmission between different age groups. Apart from a higher rate of open heart surgery in group A, the procedural complications were comparable between these age groups.ConclusionElderly patients had worse in‐hospital outcomes in early mortality and non‐home discharge following the TLE for infected CIED. There was no significant difference between elderly and non‐elderly groups in prolonged hospital stay and 30‐day readmission. Elderly patients did not have a higher risk of procedural complications.

AbstractBackgroundThe real‐world data on the safety profile of ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation among elderly patients is not well‐established. This study aimed to evaluate the procedural outcomes among those aged 18–64 years versus those aged ≥65 years who underwent catheter ablation of VT.MethodUsing the Nationwide Readmissions Database, our study included patients aged ≥18 years who underwent VT catheter ablation between 2017 and 2020. We divided the patients into non‐elderly (18–64 years old) and elderly age groups (≥65 years old). We then analyzed the in‐hospital procedural outcome and 30‐day readmission between these two groups.ResultsOur study included 2075 (49.1%) non‐elderly patients and 2153 (50.9%) elderly patients who underwent VT ablation. Post‐procedurally, elderly patients had significantly higher rates of prolonged index hospitalization (≥7 days; 35.5% vs. 29.3%, p < .01), non‐home discharge (13.4% vs. 6.0%, p < .01), 30‐day readmission (17.0% vs. 11.4%, p < .01), and early mortality (5.5% vs. 2.4%, p < .01). There was no significant difference in the procedural complications between two groups, namely vascular complications, hemopericardium/cardiac tamponade, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), major bleeding requiring blood transfusion, and systemic embolization. Through multivariable analysis, the elderly group was associated with higher odds of early mortality (OR: 7.50; CI 1.86–30.31, p = .01), non‐home discharge (OR: 2.41; CI: 1.93–3.00, p < .01) and 30‐day readmission (OR: 1.58; CI 1.32–1.89, p < .01).ConclusionElderly patients have worse in‐hospital outcome, early mortality, non‐home discharge, and 30‐day readmission following catheter ablation for VT. There was no significant difference between elderly and non‐elderly groups in the procedural complications.

Background: Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) has been increasingly performed over the past decades. However, the real-world data on the safety profile of this procedure among elderly patients is limited. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the procedural outcomes and 30-day readmission among those aged 18-64 years versus those aged ≥65 years who underwent catheter ablation of VT. Method: Using the all-payer, nationally representative Nationwide Readmissions Database, our study included patients aged 18 years or older who underwent VT catheter ablation between 2017 and 2020. We divided the patients into non-elderly (18-64 years old) and elderly age groups (≥65 years old). We then analyzed the in-hospital procedural outcome and 30-day readmission between these groups. Results: Our study included 2075 (49.1%) non-elderly patients and 2153 (50.9%) elderly patients who underwent VT ablation. Following the procedure, elderly patients had significantly higher rates of prolonged index hospitalization (≥7 days) (35.5% vs 29.3%, p<0.01), non-home discharge (13.4% vs 6.0%, p<0.01), 30-day readmission (17.0% vs 11.4%, p<0.01), and early mortality (5.5% v 2.4%, p<0.01). The median cumulative cost of hospitalization was significantly higher in the elder groups ($40,230 vs. $37,612, p ≤0.01). There was no significant difference in the procedural complications between the two groups. Through multivariable analysis, the elderly group was associated with significantly higher odds of early mortality (OR: 7.50; CI 1.86 - 30.31, p=0.01), non-home discharge (OR: 2.41; CI: 1.93 - 3.00, p<0.01) and 30-day readmissions (OR: 1.58; CI 1.32 - 1.89, p<0.01). Conclusion: Our study suggests that elderly patients have poorer in-hospital outcome in early mortality, non-home discharge and 30-day readmissions following catheter ablation for VT. There was no significant difference between elderly and non-elderly groups in the procedural complications.

AbstractBackgroundUtilization of catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) has steadily increased in recent years. Exploring short‐term outcomes is vital in health care planning and resource allocation.MethodsThe Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2010 to 2014 was queried using the ICD‐9 codes for VT (427.1) and catheter ablation (37.34) to identify study population. Incidence, causes of 30‐day readmission, in‐hospital complications as well as predictors of 30‐day readmissions, complications, and cost of care were analyzed.ResultsAmong 11 725 patients who survived to discharge after index admission for VT ablation, 1911 (16.3%) were readmitted within 30 days. Paroxysmal VT was the most common cause of 30‐day readmission (39.51%). Dyslipidemia, chronic kidney disease (CKD), previous CABG, congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic pulmonary disease, and anemia predicted increased risk of 30‐day readmissions. The overall in‐hospital complication rate was 8.2% with vascular and cardiac complications being the most common. Co‐existing CKD and CHF and the need for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) predicted higher complication rates. Similarly increasing age, CKD, CHF, anemia, in‐hospital use of MCS or left heart catheterization, teaching hospital, and disposition to nursing facilities predicted higher cost.ConclusionApproximately one in six patients was readmitted after VT ablation, with paroxysmal VT being the most common cause of the readmission. A complication rate of 8.2% was noted. We also identified a predictive model for increased risk of readmission, complication, and factors influencing the cost of care that can be utilized to improve the outcomes related to VT ablation.