Division of Cardiology, Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, MI, United States.
Department of Internal Medicine, Englewood Hospital and Medical Center, Seton Hall University-Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, Englewood, NJ, United States.
Int J Cardiol. 2019 Oct 1;292:50-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.04.056. Epub 2019 Apr 30.
Whether readmission to non-index hospitals (where the initial procedure was not performed) could result in adverse outcomes and increased utilization of healthcare resources compared with readmission to index hospitals after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear.
From January 2012 to September 2015, a nationwide readmission database was queried to identify those who were older than 50 years and had endovascular TAVR, using the International Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification code 35.05. Elective readmissions were excluded. In-hospital outcomes were compared between the index and non-index hospital readmissions. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of non-index hospital readmissions.
A total of 6808 readmissions were identified of which 2564 (37.7%) were readmitted to non-index hospitals. Residents at smaller counties, metropolitan non-teaching hospitals, or hospitals at large metropolitan areas were predictors of non-index readmissions. In-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.27, p = 0.20), acute myocardial infarction (aOR 0.83, p = 0.53), pacemaker placement (aOR 0.97, p = 0.90), acute kidney injury (aOR 0.98, p = 0.84), and stroke (aOR 1.03, p = 0.90) were similar between index and non-index readmissions but bleeding events requiring transfusions were more frequently observed in readmissions at non-index hospitals (aOR 1.32, p = 0.025). Hospital cost (15,410 dollars vs. 16,390 dollars, p = 0.25) and length of stay (5.70 days vs. 5.65 days, p = 0.85) were comparable between groups.
Non-index readmissions post-TAVR was relatively common but did not result in increased hospital mortality or healthcare utilization. Our results are reassuring for TAVR recipients with limited access to index hospitals.
经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)后,非索引医院(初始手术未在此进行的医院)的再入院是否会导致不良结局和增加医疗资源的利用,目前尚不清楚。
从 2012 年 1 月至 2015 年 9 月,通过使用国际疾病分类,第 9 修订版,临床修正代码 35.05,从全国性再入院数据库中查询年龄大于 50 岁且接受血管内 TAVR 的患者,以确定再入院患者。排除选择性再入院。比较索引和非索引医院再入院的院内结局。使用多变量逻辑回归分析确定非索引医院再入院的预测因素。
共确定 6808 例再入院,其中 2564 例(37.7%)再入院至非索引医院。位于较小县城、大都市非教学医院或大都市地区的医院的居民是再入非索引医院的预测因素。院内死亡率(调整后的优势比[aOR]1.27,p=0.20)、急性心肌梗死(aOR0.83,p=0.53)、起搏器植入(aOR0.97,p=0.90)、急性肾损伤(aOR0.98,p=0.84)和中风(aOR1.03,p=0.90)在索引和非索引再入院之间相似,但非索引再入院更常发生需要输血的出血事件(aOR1.32,p=0.025)。索引和非索引再入院的住院费用(15410 美元 vs. 16390 美元,p=0.25)和住院时间(5.70 天 vs. 5.65 天,p=0.85)相似。
TAVR 后非索引再入院较为常见,但并未导致住院死亡率或医疗保健利用率增加。对于索引医院就诊机会有限的 TAVR 接受者,我们的结果令人放心。