Mohammed Salim Al-Damluji1, Kumar Dharmarajan2, Weiwei Zhang3, Lori L Geary3, Erik Stilp4, Alan Dardik5, Carlos Mena-Hurtado4, Jeptha P Curtis6. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 2. Center for Outcome Research and Evaluation, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Division of Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 3. Center for Outcome Research and Evaluation, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 5. Yale University Vascular Biology and Therapeutics Program, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Center for Outcome Research and Evaluation, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. Electronic address: jeptha.curtis@yale.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In appropriately selected patients with severe carotid stenosis, carotid revascularization reduces ischemic stroke. Prior clinical research has focused on the efficacy and safety of carotid revascularization, but few investigators have considered readmission as a clinically important outcome. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to examine frequency, timing, and diagnoses of 30-day readmission following carotid revascularization; to assess differences in 30-day readmission between patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS); to describe hospital variation in risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRR); and to examine whether hospital variation in the choice of procedure (CEA vs. CAS) is associated with differences in RSRRs. METHODS: We used Medicare fee-for-service administrative claims data to identify acute care hospitalizations for CEA and CAS from 2009 to 2011. We calculated crude 30-day all-cause hospital readmissions following carotid revascularization. To assess differences in readmission after CAS compared with CEA, we used Kaplan-Meier survival curves and fitted mixed-effects logistic regression. We estimated hospital RSRRs using hierarchical generalized logistic regression. We stratified hospitals into 5 groups by their proportional CAS use and compared hospital group median RSRRs. RESULTS: Of 180,059 revascularizations from 2,287 hospitals, CEA and CAS were performed in 81.5% and 18.5% of cases, respectively. The unadjusted 30-day readmission rate following carotid revascularization was 9.6%. Readmission risk after CAS was greater than that after CEA. There was modest hospital-level variation in 30-day RSRRs (median: 9.5%; range 7.5% to 12.5%). Variation in proportional use of CAS was not associated with differences in hospital RSRR (range of median RSRR across hospital groups 9.49% to 9.55%; p = 0.771). CONCLUSIONS: Almost 10% of Medicare patients undergoing carotid revascularization were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. Compared with CEA, CAS was associated with a greater readmission risk. However, hospitals' RSRR did not differ by their proportional CAS use.
BACKGROUND: In appropriately selected patients with severe carotid stenosis, carotid revascularization reduces ischemic stroke. Prior clinical research has focused on the efficacy and safety of carotid revascularization, but few investigators have considered readmission as a clinically important outcome. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to examine frequency, timing, and diagnoses of 30-day readmission following carotid revascularization; to assess differences in 30-day readmission between patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS); to describe hospital variation in risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRR); and to examine whether hospital variation in the choice of procedure (CEA vs. CAS) is associated with differences in RSRRs. METHODS: We used Medicare fee-for-service administrative claims data to identify acute care hospitalizations for CEA and CAS from 2009 to 2011. We calculated crude 30-day all-cause hospital readmissions following carotid revascularization. To assess differences in readmission after CAS compared with CEA, we used Kaplan-Meier survival curves and fitted mixed-effects logistic regression. We estimated hospital RSRRs using hierarchical generalized logistic regression. We stratified hospitals into 5 groups by their proportional CAS use and compared hospital group median RSRRs. RESULTS: Of 180,059 revascularizations from 2,287 hospitals, CEA and CAS were performed in 81.5% and 18.5% of cases, respectively. The unadjusted 30-day readmission rate following carotid revascularization was 9.6%. Readmission risk after CAS was greater than that after CEA. There was modest hospital-level variation in 30-day RSRRs (median: 9.5%; range 7.5% to 12.5%). Variation in proportional use of CAS was not associated with differences in hospital RSRR (range of median RSRR across hospital groups 9.49% to 9.55%; p = 0.771). CONCLUSIONS: Almost 10% of Medicare patients undergoing carotid revascularization were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. Compared with CEA, CAS was associated with a greater readmission risk. However, hospitals' RSRR did not differ by their proportional CAS use.
Authors: Edgar Luis Galiñanes; Viktor Y Dombroviskiy; Colleen S Hupp; Robin L Kruse; Todd R Vogel Journal: Vasc Endovascular Surg Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 1.089
Authors: Linda Calvillo-King; Danielle Arnold; Kathryn J Eubank; Matthew Lo; Pete Yunyongying; Heather Stieglitz; Ethan A Halm Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2012-10-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Waleed Brinjikji; Abdulrahman M El-Sayed; David F Kallmes; Giuseppe Lanzino; Harry J Cloft Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2014-07-11 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Benjamin S Brooke; Randall R De Martino; Micah Girotti; Justin B Dimick; Philip P Goodney Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2012-06-26 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Prateek K Gupta; Sara Fernandes-Taylor; Bala Ramanan; Travis L Engelbert; K Craig Kent Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Kumar Dharmarajan; Angela F Hsieh; Zhenqiu Lin; Héctor Bueno; Joseph S Ross; Leora I Horwitz; José Augusto Barreto-Filho; Nancy Kim; Susannah M Bernheim; Lisa G Suter; Elizabeth E Drye; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-01-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Mohammed Salim Al-Damluji; Sameer Nagpal; Erik Stilp; Michael Remetz; Carlos Mena Journal: J Interv Cardiol Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Danielle C Sutzko; Elizabeth A Andraska; Andrew A Gonzalez; Apurba K Chakrabarti; Nicholas H Osborne Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2018-04-14 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Stephen van Gaal; Arshia Alimohammadi; Amy Y X Yu; Mohammad Ehsanul Karim; Wei Zhang; Jason M Sutherland Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-22 Impact factor: 2.655