The VCU Pauley Heart Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
St. Louis University Medical Center, St. Louis, MO.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Oct;98(4):703-710. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29181. Epub 2020 Aug 13.
Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) occurs in up to 10% of acute myocardial infarction admissions and is associated with high mortality, frequent adverse outcomes, prolonged hospitalizations, extensive medical resource utilization, and major cost. Using hospital cost data for Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) patients with AMICS, we sought to evaluate in hospital and 45-day outcomes and cost, comparing patients treated with percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The goal of this study was to better understand clinical and economic outcomes of AMICS to help clinicians and hospitals optimize outcomes most economically for AMICS patients.
A retrospective claims analysis identified patients from the full census Medicare Standard Analytic Files compiled by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) including: Inpatient, Outpatient, Skilled Nursing Facility and Home Health files for Medicare FFS beneficiaries. Study costs were defined as the total costs incurred by providers for treating a population with AMICS. Medicare FFS beneficiaries who experienced an inpatient admission during the index period (January 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017) with a diagnosis of AMICS were eligible for study inclusion and were identified by the presence of appropriate International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Versions (ICD-9 and ICD-10) diagnosis and procedure codes. To create a matched sample and control for any baseline differences, a 1:1 Propensity Score Matching (PSM) was performed based on criteria such as age, gender, race, geographic distribution, and 11 high-cost comorbidities (e.g., congestive HF, coronary artery disease, diabetes, etc.). Index length of stay (LOS), index costs, discharge disposition (including mortality), post-index utilization, and episode-of-care (EOC) costs were reviewed. EOC was defined as index admission for all patients plus a 45-day post index period for patients who survived the index admission.
Each cohort included 338 patients. Index in-hospital mortality rates were 53% for pVAD versus 64% for ECMO (178 vs. 217; p = .0023), and total EOC in-hospital mortality rates were 66% for pVAD versus 74% for ECMO (222 vs. 250; p = .0160). Index LOS for pVAD was 27% lower versus ECMO (12.12 vs. 16.59; p = .0006). The index LOS for patients discharged alive was 25% lower for pVAD versus ECMO (17.73 vs. 23.62; p = .0016). For patients that experienced in-hospital mortality during their index stay, pVAD had a 44% lower LOS compared to ECMO (7.08 vs. 12.66; p < .0001). Following index hospitalization, the average cost savings with additional inpatient care was 31% lower for pVAD patients ($62,188 vs. $90,087; p = NS). During the EOC, pVAD patients incurred 32% lower costs compared to ECMO patients ($117,849 vs. $172,420; <.0001).
This study of Medicare FFS patients demonstrates that hospitals utilizing pVAD for appropriately selected AMICS patients have reduced mortality rates and reduced index LOS with lower index facility costs and lower post index 45-day costs. The study results offer hospitals and clinicians an opportunity to improve clinical outcomes and reduce total EOC costs in treating patients with AMI complicated by CS.
急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克(AMICS)在急性心肌梗死患者中发生率高达 10%,与高死亡率、频繁发生不良预后、延长住院时间、广泛的医疗资源利用和高额成本相关。利用医疗保险按服务项目付费(FFS)患者的住院费用数据,我们旨在评估 AMICS 患者的住院和 45 天结局及成本,比较经皮心室辅助装置(pVAD)和体外膜氧合(ECMO)治疗的患者。本研究的目的是更好地了解 AMICS 的临床和经济结局,以帮助临床医生和医院为 AMICS 患者最经济地优化结局。
回顾性索赔分析从医疗保险标准分析文件的完整普查中确定了患者,该文件由医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)编制,包括:医疗保险 FFS 受益人的住院、门诊、熟练护理设施和家庭保健档案。研究成本被定义为治疗 AMICS 患者群体所产生的提供者总成本。在指数期(2015 年 1 月 1 日至 2017 年 3 月 31 日)内经历过住院的 AMICS 患者(通过存在适当的国际疾病分类,第九和第十版(ICD-9 和 ICD-10)诊断和程序代码)符合研究纳入标准。为了创建一个匹配的样本并控制任何基线差异,根据年龄、性别、种族、地理分布和 11 种高成本合并症(例如充血性心力衰竭、冠状动脉疾病、糖尿病等)等标准进行了 1:1 的倾向评分匹配(PSM)。审查了指数住院时间(LOS)、指数成本、出院处置(包括死亡率)、指数后利用情况和疗程(EOC)成本。EOC 被定义为所有患者的指数入院,以及指数入院存活患者的 45 天指数后期间。
每个队列都包括 338 名患者。pVAD 的指数院内死亡率为 53%,ECMO 为 64%(178 比 217;p=0.0023),pVAD 的总 EOC 院内死亡率为 66%,ECMO 为 74%(222 比 250;p=0.0160)。pVAD 的指数 LOS 比 ECMO 低 27%(12.12 比 16.59;p=0.0006)。pVAD 存活出院患者的指数 LOS 比 ECMO 低 25%(17.73 比 23.62;p=0.0016)。对于在指数住院期间发生院内死亡的患者,pVAD 的 LOS 比 ECMO 低 44%(7.08 比 12.66;p<0.0001)。在指数住院后,pVAD 患者的额外住院治疗费用平均节省 31%(62188 美元比 90087 美元;p=NS)。在 EOC 期间,pVAD 患者的成本比 ECMO 患者低 32%(117849 美元比 172420 美元;<0.0001)。
这项针对医疗保险 FFS 患者的研究表明,适当选择 AMICS 患者使用 pVAD 的医院可以降低死亡率和指数 LOS,同时降低指数机构成本和降低指数后 45 天的成本。研究结果为医院和临床医生提供了一个机会,以改善治疗 AMI 合并 CS 患者的临床结局并降低总 EOC 成本。