Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2024 Aug;35(8):1570-1578. doi: 10.1111/jce.16331. Epub 2024 Jun 4.
Same day discharge (SDD) following atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedure has emerged as routine practice, and primarily driven by operator discretion. However, the impacts of SDD on clinical outcomes, healthcare system costs, and patient reported outcomes (PROs) have not been systematically studied.
We retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing routine AF ablation procedures with SDD versus overnight observation (NSDD). After propensity adjustment we compared postprocedure adverse events (AEs), healthcare system costs, and changes in PROs.
We identified 310 cases, with 159 undergoing SDD and 151 staying at least one midnight in the hospital (NSDD). Compared with NSDD, SDD patients were similar age (mean 64 vs. 66, p = 0.3), sex (26% female vs. 27%, p = 0.8), and with lower mean CHADS-VASc scores (2.0 vs. 2.7; p < 0.011). The primary outcome of AEs was noninferior in SDD versus NSDD patients (odds ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.99; noninferiority margin of 10%). There were also no differences in overall cost to the healthcare system between SDD and NSDD (p = 0.11). PROs numerically favored SDD (p = NS for all scores).
Physician selection for SDD appears at least as safe as NSDD with respect to clinical outcomes and SDD is not significantly less costly to the health system. There is a trend towards more favorable, general PROs among SDD patients. Routine SDD should be strongly considered for patients undergoing routine AF ablation procedures.
当日出院(SDD)已成为心房颤动(AF)消融术后的常规做法,主要由术者决定。然而,SDD 对临床结果、医疗系统成本和患者报告的结果(PROs)的影响尚未得到系统研究。
我们回顾性分析了接受常规 AF 消融术并进行 SDD 与过夜观察(NSDD)的患者。在进行倾向调整后,我们比较了术后不良事件(AE)、医疗系统成本和 PROs 的变化。
我们共确定了 310 例患者,其中 159 例行 SDD,151 例至少在医院过夜(NSDD)。与 NSDD 相比,SDD 患者的年龄(平均 64 岁 vs. 66 岁,p=0.3)、性别(26%女性 vs. 27%,p=0.8)和平均 CHADS-VASc 评分(2.0 分 vs. 2.7 分;p<0.011)相似。AE 的主要结局在 SDD 患者与 NSDD 患者之间无差异(优势比 0.45,95%置信区间 0.21-0.99;非劣效性边界为 10%)。SDD 与 NSDD 之间的医疗系统总成本也没有差异(p=0.11)。SDD 组的 PROs 结果具有统计学意义(所有评分的 p=NS)。
就临床结果而言,SDD 似乎至少与 NSDD 一样安全,并且对医疗系统的成本没有显著降低。SDD 患者的 PROs 更具优势。对于接受常规 AF 消融术的患者,应强烈考虑常规 SDD。