Giuseppe D Ancona1,2, Erdal Safak3,4, Denise Weber3,4, Fatih Arslan3,4, Stephan Kische3,4, Harald Darius5, Steffen Behrens6, Dietlind Zohlenhöfer-Momm7, Jasmin Ortak3,4, Joachim Kugler8, Hüseyin Ince3,4. 1. Department of Cardiology, Vivantes Klinikum Am Urban and Im Friedrichshain, Dieffenbachstraße 1, 10967, Berlin, Germany. rgea@hotmail.com. 2. Rostock University, Rostock, Germany. rgea@hotmail.com. 3. Department of Cardiology, Vivantes Klinikum Am Urban and Im Friedrichshain, Dieffenbachstraße 1, 10967, Berlin, Germany. 4. Rostock University, Rostock, Germany. 5. Department of Cardiology, Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln, Berlin, Germany. 6. Department of Cardiology, Vivantes Klinikum Humboldt, Berlin, Germany. 7. Department of Cardiology, Vivantes Klinikum Wenckebach, Berlin, Germany. 8. University of Applied Sciences Neubrandenburg, Neubrandenburg, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: To report hospitalization costs of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) submitted to percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with the Watchman device. METHODS: Pre- and post-procedural hospitalization AF-related costs were calculated using the DRG system (diagnosis-related groups) and compared. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2016, 677 non-valvular AF patients underwent LAAC. Median time from first cardiac hospitalization to LAAC was 5.9 years (IQR 1.6-9.1) and median follow-up after LAAC was 4.8 years (IQR 3.6-5.6). LAAC mortality was 1.3% and follow-up mortality 16.9%. Median pre-LAAC hospitalization cost was € 17,867 (IQR € 7512-35,08) and post-LAAC € 8772 (IQR € 1183-25,159) (p < 0.0001). Annualized cost pre-LAAC was 3773 € (IQR € 1644-8,493) and post-LAAC 2,001 € (IQR € 260-6913) (p < 0.0001). Follow-up survivors had significantly lower post-LAAC costs (p < 0.0001) and after a survival cut-off time of 4.6 years LAAC procedural and post-procedural hospitalization costs achieved parity with pre-LACC costs (AUC 0.64; p = 0.02). CHA2DS2-VASc score (B = 0.04; p = 0.02; 95% CI 0.006-0.08), and HAS-BLED score (B = 0.08; p = 0.004; 95% CI 0.02-0.14) were independent determinants for annualized hospitalization costs post-LAAC. At Cox-regression analysis the DRG mean clinical complexity level (CCL) was the only independent determinant for follow-up mortality (OR = 2.2; p < 0.0001; 95% CI 1.6-2.8) with a cut-off value of 2.25 to predict follow-up mortality (AUC 0.72; p < 0.0001; Spec. 70%; Sens. 70%). CONCLUSION: Hospitalization costs pre-LAAC are consistent, and after LAAC, they are significantly reduced. Costs seem related to the patient's risk profile at the time of the procedure. With the increase in post-LAAC survival time, the procedure becomes economically more profitable.
AIMS: To report hospitalization costs of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) submitted to percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with the Watchman device. METHODS: Pre- and post-procedural hospitalization AF-related costs were calculated using the DRG system (diagnosis-related groups) and compared. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2016, 677 non-valvular AF patients underwent LAAC. Median time from first cardiac hospitalization to LAAC was 5.9 years (IQR 1.6-9.1) and median follow-up after LAAC was 4.8 years (IQR 3.6-5.6). LAAC mortality was 1.3% and follow-up mortality 16.9%. Median pre-LAAC hospitalization cost was € 17,867 (IQR € 7512-35,08) and post-LAAC € 8772 (IQR € 1183-25,159) (p < 0.0001). Annualized cost pre-LAAC was 3773 € (IQR € 1644-8,493) and post-LAAC 2,001 € (IQR € 260-6913) (p < 0.0001). Follow-up survivors had significantly lower post-LAAC costs (p < 0.0001) and after a survival cut-off time of 4.6 years LAAC procedural and post-procedural hospitalization costs achieved parity with pre-LACC costs (AUC 0.64; p = 0.02). CHA2DS2-VASc score (B = 0.04; p = 0.02; 95% CI 0.006-0.08), and HAS-BLED score (B = 0.08; p = 0.004; 95% CI 0.02-0.14) were independent determinants for annualized hospitalization costs post-LAAC. At Cox-regression analysis the DRG mean clinical complexity level (CCL) was the only independent determinant for follow-up mortality (OR = 2.2; p < 0.0001; 95% CI 1.6-2.8) with a cut-off value of 2.25 to predict follow-up mortality (AUC 0.72; p < 0.0001; Spec. 70%; Sens. 70%). CONCLUSION: Hospitalization costs pre-LAAC are consistent, and after LAAC, they are significantly reduced. Costs seem related to the patient's risk profile at the time of the procedure. With the increase in post-LAAC survival time, the procedure becomes economically more profitable.