Jhamnani, Sunny

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Optimal management of AF in heart failure (HF) patients remains a controversy. Recent studies have demonstrated favorable outcomes of catheter ablation versus medical therapy. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to investigate whether catheter ablation achieves better outcomes as compared to rate control. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE was conducted using PRISMA guidelines with the search terms “rate control”, “atrial fibrillation”, and “ablation.” Studies were included if they compared a catheter ablation strategy versus rate control medical therapy in HF patients. Multiple endpoints were extracted from the articles including LVEF, 6MWD, change in BNP, and Quality of Life (QoL) outcomes using the Cochrane manual. Revman 5.4 was used to aggregate the outcomes and compute statistics using a random effects model to create forest plots. Results: A total of 7 studies with 1065 patients were included in this analysis. LVEF increased by 5.69% [4.80, 6.58] p<0.00001, 6MWD increased by 24.82m [2.69, 46.94] p=0.03, BNP decreased -102.54 [-174.68, -30.40] p=0.005, and QoL outcomes using the MLHFQ improved -8.10 [-15.73, -0.48] p=0.04. Conclusions: Catheter ablation improves outcomes in HF patients with atrial fibrillation as compared to a rate control only strategy. Further large-scale randomized studies are needed to quantify improvements in outcomes.

Background: There is lack of data regarding impact of atherectomy on the length of stay (LOS) and cost of hospitalization in lower extremity arterial revascularization. Methods: HCUP’s Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2012 was queried using the ICD-9- CM code for peripheral vascular disease and procedural codes 39.90 (bare metal stent - BMS), 00.55 (drug eluting stent - DES), 17.56 (peripheral atherectomy) and 39.50 for angioplasty. Only procedures performed in patients ≥18 years of age were included. Hierarchical mixed effects linear regression models were generated to evaluate multivariate predictors of LOS and hospitalization costs. Results: A total of 13,206 (weighted: 66,030) lower extremity arterial revascularizations were identified (43.8% female & 65.5% white). Out of these, atherectomy was utilized in 23.2%. Atherectomy utilization was associated with significant reduction in LOS (4.96 ± 0.11 days vs. 5.78 ± 0.07 days, p <0.001) but higher hospitalization cost ($ 25196 ± 359 vs. $ 23408 ± 185, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed similar results with decrease in LOS (-0.71 days, -1.00 - - 0.43; p < 0.001) but higher hospitalization cost (+1875 $, +811 - +2940; p = 0.001) with atherectomy, which was matched by propensity score analysis. Additionally, emergent/urgent & weekend admissions and Charlson score ≥2 were further associated with increased LOS and hospitalization costs. (Figure) Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that atherectomy utilization is associated with significant reduction in length of stay, which was counterbalanced by a slight increase in hospitalization costs following lower extremity arterial revascularization.

Introduction: Use of transcatheter endovascular stenting has been increasing in the treatment of Coarctation of Aorta (CoA). The present study was undertaken on adults with CoA undergoing stent placement from the period of 2000 to 2011 to analyze the relationship of hospital volume to the outcomes of stenting in adults with CoA. Methods: We queried Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)’s Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2000 to 2011. Patients with CoA were identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis code of 747.10. Patients≥18 years of age undergoing endovascular stenting were identified using ICD-9-CM procedure code of 39.90. Hospital volume was divided into two groups with ≥3 and <3 procedures annually. The outcomes studied were procedure-related complications, length of stay (LOS), and cost in relation to the hospital volume. Complications were coded using specific patient safety indicator codes released by HCUP. Length of stay (≤1 and >1 days) and cost (≤ $13,830 and > $13,830) were divided at median and included in regression analysis. Results: No in-hospital death was reported in either group. Hospitals with ≥3 procedures annually had significantly lower incidence of complications (9.50% vs. 23.01%) compared to the hospitals with <3 procedures annually (p=0.002). After multivariate regression analysis, compared to hospitals with <3 procedures annually, the hospitals with ≥3 procedures annually had odds ratio (OR) of 0.40 (95% CI: 0.19-0.82, p=0.013) for having any complications, OR of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.39-1.17, p=0.15) for having LOS>1 day, and OR of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.45-1.13, p=0.15) for having cost>$13,830. Conclusion: Stenting in adults for aortic coarctation is remarkably safe and the outcomes of the procedure have improved in centers with annual hospital volume of ≥3 procedures, and there is also decreasing trend of procedure-related complications, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs compared to centers with annual volume <3 procedures.

Introduction: The data regarding use of different Mechanical Circulatory Support (MCS) devices in TAVR is limited. The present study was performed to analyze the complications and outcomes of different MCS in TAVR. Methods: The subjects under study were obtained from Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the years 2011-12 using ICD-9-CM procedure codes for TAVR and MCS. The use of MCS was divided into Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), percutaneous ventricular assist devices (PVADs) including Impella and TandemHeart, Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and percutaneous cardiopulmonary support and cardiopulmonary bypass (CBP) using ICD-9-CM codes. The incidence of in-hospital mortality and occurrence of procedure related complications were analyzed. Results: Out of total 1794 TAVR procedures, MCS was utilized in 190 (10.6%) procedures. CBP was the most commonly utilized 136 (71.6%) followed by IABP 36 (18.9%), ECMO 14 (7.4%) and 4 (2.1%). In-hospital mortality was highest with use of IABP (36.6%), followed by ECMO (14.3%), CBP (9.6%) and PVAD (0%) with p-value <0.01. The incidence of complications was similar in IABP and PVAD (100% each) followed by ECMO (85.7%) and CBP (59.4%) with p-value <0.01. Conclusion: Being retrospective in design, the present study has no information regarding indications and individual patient related variables in which each of the MCS devices used. Overall, CBP was observed as the most extensive used MCS modality with less mortality (9.6%) and least complications (59.4%).

Introduction: Short-term use of Mechanical Circulatory Support (MCS) has the potential to benefit the patients undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) who may be high-risk or suffer complications. The present study was conducted to address the contemporary use of MCS in TAVR procedures. Methods: The study included a total of 1794 TAVR procedures in the years 2011-2012 from Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Use of MCS was identified using ICD-9-CM codes. The patients were divided based on use of MCS devices. The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcomes were complications, length of stay (LOS) and cost. Multi-variate simple logistic regression models were used to identify independent predictors of the outcomes. Results: Out of total 1794 TAVR procedures, 190 (10.6 %) utilized a MCS device (MCS group) and 1,604 (89.4%) did not (non-MCS group). The use of MCS devices with TAVR was associated with increase in the in-hospital mortality (14.9% vs. 3.5%, p<0.01) with same results obtained in multi-variate models. The rates of complications were significantly higher in MCS group so as the mean length of stay (11.8±0.8 vs. 8.1±0.2 days, p<0.01) and cost ($68,997±3,656 vs. $55,878±653, p=0.03). Conclusion: Use of MCS in TAVR predicts increase in-hospital mortality, complications, LOS and cost of care.

Background: Contemporary outcome data regarding effects of atherectomy in lower extremity arterial revascularization is lacking. Methods: We queried HCUP’s Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for 2012 using the appropriate primary ICD 9-CM diagnostic code for peripheral vascular disease and procedural codes 39.90 (bare metal stent - BMS), 00.55 (drug eluting stent - DES), 17.56 (peripheral artherectomy) and 39.50 for angioplasty. Only procedures performed in patients >= 18 years were included. Hierarchical mixed effects logistic regression models were generated to evaluate multivariate predictors of outcomes. Results: In total 13,206 (weighted: 66,030) lower extremity arterial revascularization were analyzed (65.5% white, 56.2% Male & 97.4% angioplasty). Atherectomy utilization (23.2%) was associated with significant reduction in amputation (11.5% vs 13.4%), any complications (13.2% vs 16.3%) and in hospital morality (0.8% vs 1.4%) compared to no atherectomy group (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed similar results with decrease amputation (OR, 95% CI; p - value) (0.83, 0.71 - 0.97, p = 0.02) and in hospital mortality/any complication (0.79, 0.69 - 0.90, p = 0.001) with atherectomy (similar results were observed with propensity score matching). “Atherectomy only” was utilized only in 2.3%. post-hoc analysis also shows better outcomes when atherectomy was used with either angioplasty or stenting (figure a & b). subgroup multivariate analysis shows significant reduction in amputation when atherectomy was utilized in chronic limb ischemia (0.74, 0.59 - 0.93, p = 0.01) and with angioplasty (0.72, 0.60 - 0.87, p = 0.001) and trend towards advantage while used along with stents but not reaching statistical significant. Conclusion: Lower extremity atherectomy utilization was associated with significant reduction in amputation and overall complication. We observed better outcomes when atherectomy was used in conjunction with angioplasty.

ObjectiveThe aim of our study was to study the impact of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) on in‐hospital outcomes.BackgroundThere is paucity of data regarding the impact of GPI on the outcomes following peripheral endovascular interventions.MethodsThe study cohort was derived from Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between the years 2006 and 2011. Peripheral endovascular interventions and GPI utilization were identified using appropriate ICD‐9 Diagnostic and procedural codes. Two‐level hierarchical multivariate mixed models were created. The study outcomes were: primary (in‐hospital mortality and amputation studied separately) and secondary (composite of in‐hospital mortality and postprocedural complications). Hospitalization costs were also assessed.ResultsGPI utilization (OR, 95% CI, P‐value) was independently predictive of lower amputation rates (0.36, 0.27–0.49, <0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of in‐hospital mortality (0.59, 0.31–1.14, P 0.117), although GPI use predicted worse secondary outcomes (1.23, 1.03–1.47, 0.023). Following propensity matching, the amputation rate was lower (3.2% vs. 8%, P < 0.001), while hospitalization costs were higher in the cohort that received GPI ($21,091 ± 404 vs. 19,407 ± 133, P < 0.001).ConclusionsMultivariate analysis revealed GPI use in peripheral endovascular interventions to be suggestive of an increase in composite end‐point of in‐hospital mortality and postprocedural complications, no impact on in‐hospital mortality alone, significantly lower rate of amputation, and increase in hospitalization costs. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

ObjectivesWe studied the trends and predictors of drug eluting stent (DES) utilization from 2006 to 2011 to further expound the inter‐hospital variability in their utilization.BackgroundWe queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2006 and 2011 using ICD‐9‐CM procedure code, 36.06 (bare metal stent) or 36.07 (drug eluting stents) for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). Annual hospital volume was calculated using unique identification numbers and divided into quartiles for analysis.Methods and ResultsWe built a hierarchical two level model adjusted for multiple confounding factors, with hospital ID incorporated as random effects in the model. About 665,804 procedures (weighted n = 3,277,884) were analyzed. Safety concerns arising in 2006 reduced utilization DES from 90% of all PCIs performed in 2006 to a nadir of 69% in 2008 followed by increase (76% of all stents in 2009) and plateau (75% in 2011). Significant between‐hospital variation was noted in DES utilization irrespective of patient or hospital characteristics. Independent patient level predictors of DES were (OR, 95% CI, P‐value) age (0.99, 0.98–0.99, <0.001), female(1.12, 1.09–1.15, <0.001), acute myocardial infarction(0.75, 0.71–0.79, <0.001), shock (0.53, 0.49–0.58, <0.001), Charlson Co‐morbidity index (0.81,0.77–0.86, <0.001), private insurance/HMO (1.27, 1.20–1.34, <0.001), and elective admission (1.16, 1.05–1.29, <0.001). Highest quartile hospital (1.64, 1.25–2.16, <0.001) volume was associated with higher DES placement.ConclusionThere is significant between‐hospital variation in DES utilization and a higher annual hospital volume is associated with higher utilization rate of DES. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.