Obeid Tammam, Alshaikh Husain, Nejim Besma, Arhuidese Isibor, Locham Satinderjit, Malas Mahmoud
Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Md.
Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Md.
J Vasc Surg. 2017 May;65(5):1398-1406.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.11.062. Epub 2017 Feb 16.
Despite multiple landmark clinical trials, little data exists on real-world cost of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to the United States healthcare system. We aim to study differences in actual hospitalization cost between patients who underwent CAS vs CEA in a nationally representative database.
We studied hospital discharge and billing records of all patients, in the Premier Perspective Database, who underwent CEA or CAS between the third quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of 2015. Nearest-neighbor 1:1 propensity score matching was performed, to account for differences in patient and hospital characteristics as well as clinical comorbidities of patients who underwent both procedures, for both symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts using 32 variables. Pearson χ, Student t-test, and nonparametric K-sample equality-of-medians tests were used to analyze the data, as appropriate. The primary outcome was total in-hospital cost, including fixed (administrative, capital and utilities) and variable costs (labor and supply). Cost data were presented as medians, inflation-adjusted for 2015 U.S. dollar and rounded to the nearest dollar.
A total of 115,548 procedures were identified. The mean age was 71 and 69 years; 58% and 57% were male patients; and 81% and 77% were white among asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, respectively. After propensity score matching, 25,812 asymptomatic (12,906 CEA and 12,906 CAS) and 3864 symptomatic (1932 CEA and 1932 CAS) patients were included. Total hospitalization cost per CAS was 40% ($11,814 vs $8378; P < .001) and 37% ($19,426 vs $14,190; P < .001) higher than CEA among asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, respectively. Patients who underwent CAS incurred significantly higher total hospitalization cost despite stratifying by type of cost (fixed and variable), U.S. census regions and symptomatic status. Moreover, asymptomatic patients who underwent CAS performed by any surgical specialty incurred an average of $2717 to $4918 higher total hospitalization cost compared with patients who underwent CEA (all P < 001). Among symptomatic patients, those who underwent CAS performed by vascular, cardiac, and neurologic surgeons, incurred $2108 ($16,114 vs $14,006; P = .006), $7055 ($17,351 vs $10,296; P = .023) and $6479 ($27,290 vs $20,811; P = .002) higher total hospitalization cost compared with patients who underwent CEA, respectively.
The total hospitalization cost incurred by patients who underwent CAS was significantly higher than for those who underwent CEA, despite matching cohort based on patient and hospital characteristics, and stratifying by symptomatic status, type of cost, hospital region, and surgeon specialty. Our findings could provide additional important information giving the ongoing controversy regarding the appropriate indication for CAS.
尽管有多项具有里程碑意义的临床试验,但关于颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)和颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)在美国医疗保健系统中的实际成本的数据却很少。我们旨在研究在一个具有全国代表性的数据库中,接受CAS与CEA治疗的患者之间实际住院费用的差异。
我们研究了Premier Perspective数据库中在2009年第三季度至2015年第一季度期间接受CEA或CAS治疗的所有患者的出院和计费记录。使用32个变量对有症状和无症状队列进行最近邻1:1倾向评分匹配,以考虑接受这两种手术的患者的患者和医院特征以及临床合并症的差异。根据情况使用Pearson χ检验、Student t检验和非参数K样本中位数相等性检验来分析数据。主要结局是住院总费用,包括固定费用(行政、资本和公用事业)和可变费用(劳动力和供应)。成本数据以中位数表示,按2015年美元进行通货膨胀调整并四舍五入到最接近的美元。
共识别出115,548例手术。无症状和有症状患者的平均年龄分别为71岁和69岁;男性患者分别为58%和57%;无症状和有症状患者中白人分别为81%和77%。经过倾向评分匹配后,纳入了25,812例无症状患者(12,906例CEA和12,906例CAS)和3864例有症状患者(1932例CEA和1932例CAS)。在无症状和有症状患者中,CAS的住院总费用分别比CEA高40%(11,814美元对8378美元;P <.001)和37%(19,426美元对14,190美元;P <.001)。尽管按费用类型(固定和可变)、美国人口普查区域和症状状态进行分层,但接受CAS治疗的患者的住院总费用仍显著更高。此外,与接受CEA治疗的患者相比,由任何外科专业进行CAS治疗的无症状患者的住院总费用平均高出2717美元至4918美元(所有P < 0.001)。在有症状患者中,由血管外科医生、心脏外科医生和神经外科医生进行CAS治疗的患者的住院总费用分别比接受CEA治疗的患者高出2108美元(分别为16,114美元对14,006美元;P =.006)、7055美元(分别为17,351美元对10,296美元;P =.023)和6479美元(分别为27,290美元对20,811美元;P =.002)。
尽管根据患者和医院特征进行队列匹配,并按症状状态、费用类型、医院区域和外科医生专业进行分层,但接受CAS治疗的患者的住院总费用仍显著高于接受CEA治疗的患者。我们的研究结果可以提供额外的重要信息,以应对目前关于CAS合适适应症的争议。