Nguyen, Amanda

ABSTRACT Background Disparities in management of atrial fibrillation in rural and urban hospitals across the U.S. have been reported. However, studies investigating disparities regarding outcomes and complications after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) based on hospital location are lacking. Objective To evaluate differences in outcomes and complications related to LAAO among rural and urban hospitals. Methods The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who underwent LAAO implantations in the U.S. from 2016−2020. Study endpoints assessed included inpatient complications, outcomes, and resource utilization after LAAO procedures among rural and urban hospitals. Results From 2016−2020, there were a total of 87 315 and 1985 LAAO device placements in urban and rural hospitals, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar among both groups, with a few exceptions. After multivariable adjustment for confounders, odds of inpatient complications and mortality were similar among both groups. However, rural LAAO recipients experienced greater rates of discharge to an acute care facility (3.3% vs 2.4%, p = 0.01), as well as lower costs (aOR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.49–0.69) and length of stay (aOR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81–0.98). Conclusions A majority of LAAO implantations occurred in urban hospitals in the U.S. Baseline characteristics and adjusted odds of inpatient complications and mortality were similar in rural and urban recipients. However, important differences were described regarding resource utilization and disposition. Further investigation into the specific factors driving these inequities is encouraged to promote improved access to and outcomes of cardiovascular care for rural residents.

Background: The safety and cost of concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) procedure remain unknown. Objective: The study sought to determine real-world outcomes of AF patients who underwent LAAO with ablation. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample and International Classification of Diseases–Tenth Revision codes were used to identify patients who underwent LAAO with and without AF ablation during the years 2016-2022. The outcomes assessed included procedural complications and resource utilization. Results: LAAO with AF ablation was associated with a higher rate of overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37-1.74), major complications (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.18-1.60), non-home discharge (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.23-1.96), prolonged length of stay >1 day (OR 3.21, 95% CI 2.92-3.52), and increased hospitalization costs as defined by median cost >$25,926 (OR 19.42, 95% CI 16.21-23.25) when compared to LAAO alone after adjustment for potential confounding variables. Patients who underwent LAAO with ablation were also more likely to receive pacemaker implantation (3.6 % vs 0.2%, P < 0.001) and experience acute kidney injury (3.9% vs 2.1%, P < 0.001) and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (3.7% vs 1.5%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: In a large, contemporary, real-world study of LAAO procedures in the United States, concomitant AF ablation was associated with a higher rate of overall and major complications and an increased resource utilization.