Literature DB >> 19289660

Combined aortic debranching and thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) effective but at a cost.

Erin H Murphy1, Adam W Beck, G Patrick Clagett, J Michael DiMaio, Michael E Jessen, Frank R Arko.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare hybrid repair (HR) (aortic debranching and TEVAR) with conventional open thoracoabdominal and aortic arch repairs (OR), including a cost analysis.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort.
SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: Thirty patients with thoracoabdominal aneurysms were evaluated between November 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006.
INTERVENTIONS: There were 18 HRs and 12 ORs. Aortic abnormalities included the arch, visceral aorta, and arch/visceral aorta combined. Aortic debranching with TEVAR (HR) was performed at a single setting. Dacron grafts were used for OR, and branch vessels were bypassed. Hospital costs and reimbursements were obtained from the finance department. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative morbidity, mortality, and cost.
RESULTS: Patients were significantly older in the HR group (mean [SD], 72 [8.9] vs 58 [17.4] years, P = .2). The HR group had significantly less blood loss (mean [SD], 1.7 [2.3] vs 4.8 [3.1] L, P = .004), transfusions (5.1 [5.9] vs 14.7 [7.8] units, P = .001), renal failure (0% vs 42.0%, P = .002), and pulmonary morbidity (17% vs 67%, P < .001); shorter intensive care unit stays (5.2 [4.8] vs 16.4 [12.9] days, P = .005); and shorter hospital length of stay (mean [SD], 11.6 [6.2] vs 20.8 [10.8] days, P = .01). There were no differences in mortality or spinal cord ischemia. There was no difference in mean direct hospital costs (HR: $59,435.70 vs OR: $49,341; P = .35). However, the mean cost margin per case was -34% for HR and +6.2% for OR (P = .04).
CONCLUSIONS: Improved clinical outcomes are seen after HR despite treatment of an older, sicker patient population. However, HR ultimately comes at a significant cost to the hospital, with a 34% loss in revenue per case.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19289660     DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.2009.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Surg        ISSN: 0004-0010


  6 in total

1.  Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair using aortic arch chimney stents in high-risk patients.

Authors:  Igor Voskresensky; Salvatore T Scali; Robert J Feezor; Javairiah Fatima; Kristina A Giles; Rosamaria Tricarico; Scott A Berceli; Adam W Beck
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.268

2.  Evolving practice pattern changes and outcomes in the era of hybrid aortic arch repair.

Authors:  Ehsan Benrashid; Hanghang Wang; Jeffrey E Keenan; Nicholas D Andersen; James M Meza; Richard L McCann; G Chad Hughes
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 4.268

3.  Hybrid Treatment with Complete Transposition of Supra-Aortic Trunks versus Conventional Surgery for the Treatment of Aortic Arch Aneurysm.

Authors:  Leonardo de Oliveira Souza; Rodrigo de Castro Bernardes; Túlio Pinho Navarro; Ricardo Jayme Procópio; Fernando Antônio Roquete Reis; Luiz Claudio Moreira Lima; Ernesto Lentz da Silveira
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2017 Sep-Oct

4.  Hybrid repair versus conventional open repair for thoracic aortic arch aneurysms.

Authors:  Ala Elhelali; Niamh Hynes; Declan Devane; Sherif Sultan; Edel P Kavanagh; Liam Morris; Dave Veerasingam; Fionnuala Jordan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-06-04

5.  Follicular lesions of the thyroid: a surgical perspective.

Authors:  M J Williams; R A J Spence; T F Lioe
Journal:  Ulster Med J       Date:  2015-01

6.  Extensive Operation as One of the Solution for Patients with the Insufficient Proximal Landing Zone for TEVAR in Aortic Dissection - short term results.

Authors:  Mirsad Kacila; Haris Vranic; Slavenka Straus
Journal:  Acta Inform Med       Date:  2014-12-19
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.