Weill Cornell Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Group (CORG), Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Weill Cornell Medicine-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York.
Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, New York Presbyterian Hospital-Queens, Flushing, New York.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020 Aug;31(8):1908-1919. doi: 10.1111/jce.14584. Epub 2020 Jun 4.
The real-world distribution of hospital atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation volume and its impact on outcomes are not well-established. We sought to examine patient characteristics, complications, and readmissions after AF ablation stratified by hospital procedural volume.
Using the nationally representative inpatient Nationwide Readmissions Database, we evaluated 54 597 admissions for AF ablation between 2010 and 2014. Hospitals were categorized according to tertiles of annual AF ablation volume. Index complications, 30-day readmissions, and early mortality were examined. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the predictors of adverse outcomes. Between 2010 and 2014, low volume tertile hospitals accounted for 79.3% of hospitals performing AF ablations. When stratified by first, second, and third volume tertiles, complication and early mortality rates were higher in low volume centers (8.9% and 0.67% vs 6.1% and 0.33%, vs 4.5% and 0.16%, respectively; P < .001). Patients undergoing AF ablation at low volume centers were older and had a higher prevalence of congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, and other comorbidities. Low volume hospitals were associated with increased cardiac perforation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.79; P < .001), vascular complications (aOR 1.49; P < .001), and any complication (aOR 2.06; P < .001) during index admission as well as increased early mortality (aOR 2.43; P = .039).
Among patients hospitalized for AF ablation, low inpatient AF ablation hospital volume was associated with worse outcomes following ablation, which was exacerbated by a greater comorbidity burden among patients at these centers.
医院房颤(AF)消融量的实际分布及其对结果的影响尚未得到充分证实。我们旨在研究根据医院程序量分层的 AF 消融后患者特征、并发症和再入院情况。
利用具有全国代表性的住院患者全国再入院数据库,我们评估了 2010 年至 2014 年间 54597 例 AF 消融住院患者。根据每年 AF 消融量的三分位数对医院进行分类。检查了索引并发症、30 天再入院和早期死亡率。采用多变量逻辑回归评估不良结局的预测因素。2010 年至 2014 年间,低容量三分位组医院占行 AF 消融的医院的 79.3%。按第一、第二和第三体积三分位数分层时,低容量中心的并发症和早期死亡率较高(8.9%和 0.67%,6.1%和 0.33%,4.5%和 0.16%;P<.001)。在低容量中心行 AF 消融的患者年龄较大,且充血性心力衰竭、冠状动脉疾病和其他合并症的患病率较高。低容量医院与心脏穿孔(调整后优势比 [aOR],4.79;P<.001)、血管并发症(aOR 1.49;P<.001)和任何并发症(aOR 2.06;P<.001)的发生率较高以及早期死亡率较高(aOR 2.43;P=.039)有关。
在因 AF 消融住院的患者中,低容量医院的住院 AF 消融量与消融后结果较差相关,而这些中心的患者合并症负担更重,使情况恶化。