Arnold J Greenspon1, Elizabeth L Eby2, Allison A Petrilla3, M Rizwan Sohail4. 1. Cardiac Electrophysiology Laboratory, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Medtronic, Plc., Mounds View, MN, USA. 3. Avalere Health, Washington, DC, USA. 4. Divisions of Infectious Diseases and Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is a serious adverse event, but there are limited contemporary real-world data on treatment pathways and associated costs in the Medicare population following diagnosis of CIED infection. Hence, this study evaluates postinfection treatment pathways and associated healthcare expenditures and mortality among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with CIED infection. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of 5,401 beneficiaries who developed a device-related infection in the year following implantation/upgraded CIED (1/1/2010-12/31/2012). Patients were followed-up to 12 months/death following diagnosis of infection and were divided into mutually exclusive groups based on whether they underwent CIED system removal (Group I), or no CIED system intervention (Group II; IIA with or IIB without infection hospitalization). All-cause healthcare resource utilization/expenditures were also measured. RESULTS: In the year following infection, 64.1% of patients underwent device extraction, of who 2,109 (39.0%) had their device replaced (Group IA) and 1,355 (25.1%) had their device extracted without replacement (Group IB); 62.2% of patients were hospitalized and 25.3% of patients died. Mean Medicare payments-per-patient for facility-based services by group were: IA = $62,638 (standard deviation [SD]: $46,830), IB = $50,079 (SD: $45,006), IIA = $77,397 (SD: $79,130), and IIB = $22,856 (SD: $31,167). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalizations were the largest cost driver; infection-related costs, including cost of extraction/replacement, accounted for >50% of expenditures for patients with surgical/hospital intervention. Management of CIED infection in Medicare beneficiaries is associated with high healthcare expenditures in the year following infection. Additional measures to prevent device infection are needed to improve the outcomes and reduce costs in these patients.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is a serious adverse event, but there are limited contemporary real-world data on treatment pathways and associated costs in the Medicare population following diagnosis of CIED infection. Hence, this study evaluates postinfection treatment pathways and associated healthcare expenditures and mortality among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with CIED infection. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of 5,401 beneficiaries who developed a device-related infection in the year following implantation/upgraded CIED (1/1/2010-12/31/2012). Patients were followed-up to 12 months/death following diagnosis of infection and were divided into mutually exclusive groups based on whether they underwent CIED system removal (Group I), or no CIED system intervention (Group II; IIA with or IIB without infection hospitalization). All-cause healthcare resource utilization/expenditures were also measured. RESULTS: In the year following infection, 64.1% of patients underwent device extraction, of who 2,109 (39.0%) had their device replaced (Group IA) and 1,355 (25.1%) had their device extracted without replacement (Group IB); 62.2% of patients were hospitalized and 25.3% of patients died. Mean Medicare payments-per-patient for facility-based services by group were: IA = $62,638 (standard deviation [SD]: $46,830), IB = $50,079 (SD: $45,006), IIA = $77,397 (SD: $79,130), and IIB = $22,856 (SD: $31,167). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalizations were the largest cost driver; infection-related costs, including cost of extraction/replacement, accounted for >50% of expenditures for patients with surgical/hospital intervention. Management of CIED infection in Medicare beneficiaries is associated with high healthcare expenditures in the year following infection. Additional measures to prevent device infection are needed to improve the outcomes and reduce costs in these patients.
Authors: François Philippon; Gilles E O'Hara; Jean Champagne; Stefan H Hohnloser; Michael Glikson; Jörg Neuzner; Philippe Mabo; Xavier Vinolas; Josef Kautzner; Fredrik Gadler; Noa Lashevsky; Stuart J Connolly; Yan Y Liu; Jeff S Healey Journal: CJC Open Date: 2020-04-25
Authors: Bruce L Wilkoff; Giuseppe Boriani; Suneet Mittal; Jeanne E Poole; Charles Kennergren; G Ralph Corey; John C Love; Ralph Augostini; Svein Faerestrand; Sherman S Wiggins; Jeff S Healey; Reece Holbrook; Jeffrey D Lande; Daniel R Lexcen; Sarah Willey; Khaldoun G Tarakji Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2020-04-12
Authors: Bruce L Wilkoff; Giuseppe Boriani; Suneet Mittal; Jeanne E Poole; Charles Kennergren; G Ralph Corey; Andrew D Krahn; Edward J Schloss; Jose L Gallastegui; Robert A Pickett; Rudolph F Evonich; Steven F Roark; Denise M Sorrentino; Darius P Sholevar; Edmond M Cronin; Brett J Berman; David W Riggio; Hafiza H Khan; Marc T Silver; Jack Collier; Zayd Eldadah; Reece Holbrook; Jeff D Lande; Daniel R Lexcen; Swathi Seshadri; Khaldoun G Tarakji Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2020-09-11
Authors: Giuseppe Boriani; Marco Proietti; Matteo Bertini; Igor Diemberger; Pietro Palmisano; Stefano Baccarini; Francesco Biscione; Nicola Bottoni; Antonio Ciccaglioni; Alessandro Dal Monte; Franco Alberto Ferrari; Saverio Iacopino; Marcello Piacenti; Daniele Porcelli; Stefano Sangiorgio; Luca Santini; Michele Malagù; Giuseppe Stabile; Jacopo Francesco Imberti; Davide Caruso; Massimo Zoni-Berisso; Roberto De Ponti; Renato Pietro Ricci Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-01-11