O'Byrne Michael L, Shinohara Russell T, Grant Elena K, Kanter Joshua P, Gillespie Matthew J, Dori Yoav, Rome Jonathan J, Glatz Andrew C
Division of Cardiology, Children's National Health System and Department of Pediatrics George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC.
Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Am Heart J. 2017 Oct;192:85-97. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2017.07.012. Epub 2017 Jul 19.
Concern for device erosion following transcatheter treatment of atrial septal defects (TC-ASD) led in 2012 to a United States Food and Drug Administration panel review and changes in the instructions for use of the Amplatzer Septal Occluder (ASO) device. No studies have assessed the effect of these changes on real-world practice. To this end a multicenter observational study was performed to evaluate trends in the treatment of ASD.
A retrospective observational study was performed using data from the Pediatric Health Information Systems database of all patients with isolated ASD undergoing either TC-ASD or operative ASD closure (O-ASD) from January 1, 2007, to September 30, 2015, hypothesizing that the propensity to pursue O-ASD increased beginning in 2013.
A total of 6,392 cases from 39 centers underwent ASD closure (82% TC-ASD). Adjusting for patient factors, between 2007 and 2012, the probability of pursuing O-ASD decreased (odds ratio [OR] 0.95 per year, P = .03). This trend reversed beginning in 2013, with the probability of O-ASD increasing annually (OR 1.21, P = .006). There was significant between-hospital variation in the choice between TC-ASD and O-ASD (median OR 2.79, P < .0001). The age of patients undergoing ASD closure (regardless of method) decreased over the study period (P = .04). Cost of O-ASD increased over the study period, whereas cost of TC-ASD and length of stay for both O-ASD and TC-ASD was unchanged.
Although TC-ASD remains the predominant method of ASD closure, the propensity to pursue O-ASD has increased significantly following changes in instructions for use for ASO. Further research is necessary to determine what effect this has on outcomes and resource utilization.
对经导管治疗房间隔缺损(TC-ASD)后装置侵蚀的担忧,在2012年促使美国食品药品监督管理局小组进行审查,并对Amplatzer房间隔封堵器(ASO)装置的使用说明做出了更改。尚无研究评估这些更改对实际临床实践的影响。为此,开展了一项多中心观察性研究,以评估房间隔缺损治疗的趋势。
采用儿科健康信息系统数据库的数据进行回顾性观察性研究,纳入2007年1月1日至2015年9月30日期间所有接受TC-ASD或手术房间隔缺损封堵术(O-ASD)的孤立性房间隔缺损患者,假设自2013年起选择O-ASD的倾向增加。
来自39个中心的6392例患者接受了房间隔缺损封堵术(82%为TC-ASD)。校正患者因素后,2007年至2012年期间,选择O-ASD的概率下降(每年比值比[OR]为0.95,P = 0.03)。这一趋势在2013年开始逆转,O-ASD的概率逐年增加(OR为1.21,P = 0.006)。在TC-ASD和O-ASD之间的选择上,医院之间存在显著差异(中位数OR为2.79,P < 0.0001)。在研究期间,接受房间隔缺损封堵术(无论采用何种方法)的患者年龄有所下降(P = 0.04)。在研究期间,O-ASD的费用增加,而TC-ASD的费用以及O-ASD和TC-ASD的住院时间均未改变。
尽管TC-ASD仍然是房间隔缺损封堵的主要方法,但在ASO使用说明更改后,选择O-ASD的倾向显著增加。有必要进一步研究以确定这对治疗结果和资源利用有何影响。