Rebecca Sorber1, Joseph K Canner2, Christopher J Abularrage1, Paula K Shireman3, Dorry L Segev4, James H Black Iii1, Karen Woo5, Caitlin W Hicks6. 1. Divison of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore MD. 2. Johns Hopkins Surgical Outcomes Research, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore MD. 3. Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Texas Health San Antonio Long School of Medicine & the South Texas Veterans Health Care System, San Antonio, TX. 4. Division of Transplant Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore MD. 5. Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles CA. 6. Divison of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore MD.; Johns Hopkins Surgical Outcomes Research, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore MD.. Electronic address: chicks11@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The creation and maintenance of durable hemodialysis access is critically important for reducing patient morbidity and controlling overall costs within health systems. Our objective was to quantify the costs associated with hemodialysis access creation and its maintenance over time within a rate-controlled health system where charges equate to payments. METHODS: The Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission administrative claims database was used to identify patients who underwent first-time access creation from 2012-2020. Patients were identified using CPT codes for access creation, and costs were accrued for the initial encounter and all subsequent outpatient access-related encounters. T-tests and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare reinterventions and access-related costs ($USD) between arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) and arteriovenous grafts (AVG). Multivariable modeling was used to quantify the association of access type with charge variation. RESULTS: Overall, 12,716 patients underwent first-time access creation (69.3% AVF vs. 30.7% AVG). There was no difference in freedom from reintervention between the two access types at any point following creation (HR: 1.03, 95%CI: 0.97-1.10); however, AVF were associated with a lower number of cumulative reinterventions (1.50 vs. 2.24) compared to AVG (P<0.0001). AVF was associated with lower overall costs in the year of creation ($9,388 vs. $13,539, P<0.0001), a difference that remained significant over the subsequent 3 years. The lower costs associated with AVF were present both in the costs associated with creation and subsequent maintenance. On multivariable analysis, AVF was associated with a $3,557 reduction in total access-related costs versus AVG (95%CI -$3828, -3287). CONCLUSION: AVF require fewer interventions and are associated with lower costs at placement and over the first three years of maintenance compared to AVG. The use of AVF for first-time hemodialysis access represents an opportunity for healthcare savings in appropriately selected patients with a high preoperative likelihood of AVF maturation.
OBJECTIVES: The creation and maintenance of durable hemodialysis access is critically important for reducing patient morbidity and controlling overall costs within health systems. Our objective was to quantify the costs associated with hemodialysis access creation and its maintenance over time within a rate-controlled health system where charges equate to payments. METHODS: The Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission administrative claims database was used to identify patients who underwent first-time access creation from 2012-2020. Patients were identified using CPT codes for access creation, and costs were accrued for the initial encounter and all subsequent outpatient access-related encounters. T-tests and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare reinterventions and access-related costs ($USD) between arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) and arteriovenous grafts (AVG). Multivariable modeling was used to quantify the association of access type with charge variation. RESULTS: Overall, 12,716 patients underwent first-time access creation (69.3% AVF vs. 30.7% AVG). There was no difference in freedom from reintervention between the two access types at any point following creation (HR: 1.03, 95%CI: 0.97-1.10); however, AVF were associated with a lower number of cumulative reinterventions (1.50 vs. 2.24) compared to AVG (P<0.0001). AVF was associated with lower overall costs in the year of creation ($9,388 vs. $13,539, P<0.0001), a difference that remained significant over the subsequent 3 years. The lower costs associated with AVF were present both in the costs associated with creation and subsequent maintenance. On multivariable analysis, AVF was associated with a $3,557 reduction in total access-related costs versus AVG (95%CI -$3828, -3287). CONCLUSION: AVF require fewer interventions and are associated with lower costs at placement and over the first three years of maintenance compared to AVG. The use of AVF for first-time hemodialysis access represents an opportunity for healthcare savings in appropriately selected patients with a high preoperative likelihood of AVF maturation.
Authors: Charmaine E Lok; Thomas S Huber; Timmy Lee; Surendra Shenoy; Alexander S Yevzlin; Kenneth Abreo; Michael Allon; Arif Asif; Brad C Astor; Marc H Glickman; Janet Graham; Louise M Moist; Dheeraj K Rajan; Cynthia Roberts; Tushar J Vachharajani; Rudolph P Valentini Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Caitlin W Hicks; Peiqi Wang; Amber Kernodle; Ying W Lum; James H Black; Martin A Makary Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Rasheeda K Hall; Evan R Myers; Sylvia E Rosas; Ann M O'Hare; Cathleen S Colón-Emeric Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Nathan K Itoga; Ning Tang; Diana Patterson; Rika Ohkuma; Raymond Lew; Matthew W Mell; Ronald L Dalman Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2018-06-28 Impact factor: 4.268