Kaelan Chan1, Ahmed M Abou-Zamzam2, Karen Woo3. 1. University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 2. Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA. 3. Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. Electronic address: kwoo@mednet.ucla.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine the use of preoperative cardiac stress testing (PCST) in the Southern California Vascular Outcomes Improvement Collaborative (So Cal VOICe). METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on data in all modules of the So Cal VOICe from September 2012 through May 2016. PCST was defined as stress echocardiogram or nuclear stress test. A new postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) was defined as troponin elevation and/or electrocardiogram/imaging changes with or without ischemic symptoms. Only elective cases in patients with asymptomatic cardiac status were included in the study. RESULTS: During the study period, 3,063 procedures meeting the inclusion criteria were performed in 7 registries: carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid artery stent, thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair, infrainguinal bypass (Infra), endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), suprainguinal bypass (Supra), and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAAA). PCST varied across registries from 17% in PVI to 62% in OAAA. PCST in CEA varied across 9 institutions from 10% to 79%. PCST in EVAR varied across 7 institutions from 14% to 83%. PCST in Infra varied across 4 institutions from 10% to 57%. Of the 12 patients across all registries who had a new MI, 6 had PCST, one of which was abnormal. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PCST varies widely across registries and institutions in the So Cal VOICe. Despite the wide variation, the incidence of new postoperative MI is exceptionally low. Further studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the PCST practices and future quality improvement efforts should focus on standardization of indications for PCST.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine the use of preoperative cardiac stress testing (PCST) in the Southern California Vascular Outcomes Improvement Collaborative (So Cal VOICe). METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on data in all modules of the So Cal VOICe from September 2012 through May 2016. PCST was defined as stress echocardiogram or nuclear stress test. A new postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) was defined as troponin elevation and/or electrocardiogram/imaging changes with or without ischemic symptoms. Only elective cases in patients with asymptomatic cardiac status were included in the study. RESULTS: During the study period, 3,063 procedures meeting the inclusion criteria were performed in 7 registries: carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid artery stent, thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair, infrainguinal bypass (Infra), endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), suprainguinal bypass (Supra), and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAAA). PCST varied across registries from 17% in PVI to 62% in OAAA. PCST in CEA varied across 9 institutions from 10% to 79%. PCST in EVAR varied across 7 institutions from 14% to 83%. PCST in Infra varied across 4 institutions from 10% to 57%. Of the 12 patients across all registries who had a new MI, 6 had PCST, one of which was abnormal. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PCST varies widely across registries and institutions in the So Cal VOICe. Despite the wide variation, the incidence of new postoperative MI is exceptionally low. Further studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the PCST practices and future quality improvement efforts should focus on standardization of indications for PCST.
Authors: Edward O McFalls; Herbert B Ward; Thomas E Moritz; Steven Goldman; William C Krupski; Fred Littooy; Gordon Pierpont; Steve Santilli; Joseph Rapp; Brack Hattler; Kendrick Shunk; Connie Jaenicke; Lizy Thottapurathu; Nancy Ellis; Domenic J Reda; William G Henderson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-12-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael Farias; Kathy Jenkins; James Lock; Rahul Rathod; Jane Newburger; David W Bates; Dana G Safran; Kevin Friedman; Josh Greenberg Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: C de Virgilio; K Toosie; M Elbassir; C Donayre; J D Baker; K Narahara; F Mishkin; R J Lewis; C Chang; R White; F V Mody Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Yassar Almanaseer; Debabrata Mukherjee; Eva M Kline-Rogers; Sean K Kesterson; Seema S Sonnad; Bruce Rogers; Dean Smith; Scott Furney; Robert Ernst; Jane McCort; Kim A Eagle Journal: Cardiology Date: 2004-11-03 Impact factor: 1.869
Authors: James B Froehlich; Dean Karavite; Pamela L Russman; Nurum Erdem; Chris Wise; Gerald Zelenock; Thomas Wakefield; James Stanley; Kim A Eagle Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: George R Verghese; Kevin G Friedman; Rahul H Rathod; Amir Meiri; Susan F Saleeb; Dionne A Graham; Robert L Geggel; David R Fulton Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 5.501