Endovascular interventions decrease length of hospitalization and are cost-effective in acute mesenteric ischemia.

Link to article at PubMed

Related Articles

Endovascular interventions decrease length of hospitalization and are cost-effective in acute mesenteric ischemia.

J Vasc Surg. 2018 08;68(2):459-469

Authors: Erben Y, Protack CD, Jean RA, Sumpio BJ, Miller SM, Liu S, Trejo G, Sumpio BE

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) continues to be one of the most devastating diagnoses requiring emergent vascular intervention. There is a national trend toward increased use of endovascular procedures, with improved survival for the treatment of these patients. Our aim was to evaluate whether this trend has changed the treatment of AMI and the subsequent impact on length of hospitalization and hospitalization costs.
METHODS: We identified all patients admitted for AMI from the National Inpatient Sample from 2004 to 2014 who received open surgical revascularization (OPEN) or an endovascular intervention (ENDO). Primary end points included length of hospital stay and cost of hospitalization. Our secondary end points included acute kidney injury (AKI), in-hospital mortality, and routine discharge.
RESULTS: Among 10,381 discharges identified in the data set, 3833 (37%; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 35%-39%) were male patients with a mean age of 69 years (range, 18-98 years); 4543 (44%; 97.5% CI, 41%-47%) patients were treated ENDO, and 5839 (56%; 97.5% CI, 53%-59%) patients were treated OPEN. Although a higher proportion of patients in the ENDO group (28%; 97.5% CI, 24%-31%) vs the OPEN group (14%; 97.5% CI, 11%-16%) had a moderate to severe Charlson Comorbidity Index (P < .0001), ENDO was associated with a lower mortality rate (12.3% [97.5% CI, 9.8%-14.8%] vs 33.1% [97.5% CI, 29.9%-36.2%]; P < .0001) and a lower mean hospitalization cost ($41,615 [97.5% CI, $38,663-$44,567] vs $60,286 [97.5% CI, $56,736-$63,836]; P < .0001). After propensity-adjusted logistic regression analysis, OPEN retained a significant association with higher mortality than ENDO (odds ratio, 3.0; 97.5% CI, 2.2-4.1) and with higher costs (mean, $9196; 97.5% CI, $3797-$14,595). Patients in the OPEN group had higher risk for AKI (P < .0001) and discharge to a skilled nursing facility (P < .0001) rather than home.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the rate of ENDO continues to rise nationally, it still has not surpassed OPEN revascularization in the face of AMI. Patients treated endovascularly demonstrated one-third the rate of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 3.0; 97.5% CI, 2.2-4.1), an increased hazard ratio for discharge alive (hazard ratio, 2.27; 97.5% CI, 2.00-2.58), and a cost saving of $9196 (97.5% CI, $3797-$14,595) per hospitalization. Furthermore, they were less likely to develop AKI and to be discharged home after hospitalization.

PMID: 29459015 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *