Literature DB >> 36256698

Economics of Minimalist Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Results From the 3M-TAVR Economic Study.

Neel M Butala1, David A Wood2, Haiyan Li3, Khaja Chinnakondepalli3, Sandra B Lauck2, Janarthanan Sathananthan2, John A Cairns2, Elizabeth A Magnuson3, Madeleine Barker2, John G Webb2, Robert Welsh4, Anson Cheung2, Jian Ye2, James L Velianou5, Harindra C Wijeysundera6, Anita Asgar7, Susheel Kodali8, Vinod H Thourani9, David J Cohen10,11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The 3M-TAVR trial (3M-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement) demonstrated the feasibility and safety of next-day hospital discharge after transfemoral TAVR with implementation of a minimalist pathway. However, the economic impact of this approach is unknown. Therefore, we evaluated costs for patients undergoing minimalist TAVR compared with conventional TAVR.
METHODS: We used propensity matching to compare resource utilization and costs (from a US health care system perspective) for patients in the 3M-TAVR trial with those for transfemoral TAVR patients enrolled in the contemporaneous S3i trial (PARTNER SAPIEN-3 Intermediate Risk). Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource utilization for both groups. For the S3i group, all other costs through 30-day follow-up were assessed by linkage with Medicare claims; for 3M, these costs were assessed using regression models derived from S3i cost and resource utilization data.
RESULTS: After 1:1 propensity matching, 351 pairs were included in our study (mean age 82, mean Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score 5.3%). There were no differences in death, stroke, or rehospitalization between the 3M-TAVR and S3i groups through 30-day follow-up. Index hospitalization costs were $10 843/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort, driven by reductions in procedure duration, anesthesia costs, and length of stay. Between discharge and 30 days, costs were similar for the 2 groups such that cumulative 30-day costs were $11 305/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort compared with the S3i cohort ($49 425 versus $60 729, 95% CI for difference $9378 to $13 138; P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional transfemoral TAVR, use of a minimalist pathway in intermediate-risk patients was associated with similar clinical outcomes and substantial in-hospital cost savings, which were sustained through 30 days. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02287662.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Medicare; costs and cost analysis; hospital; hospitalization; length of stay; transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36256698      PMCID: PMC9575578          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.122.012168

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1941-7640            Impact factor:   7.514


  14 in total

1.  Safety of same-day discharge after uncomplicated, minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the COVID-19 era.

Authors:  Emily Perdoncin; Adam B Greenbaum; Kendra J Grubb; Vasilis C Babaliaros; Patricia Keegan; Brendan Ceretto-Clark; Jane Wei; Robert A Guyton; Gaetano Paone; Isida Byku; Patrick T Gleason; Kelby Biven; Preethy Mathew; Cecilia Mortorano; Errol K Inci; Christian Faaborg-Andersen; Rae Mitchell; Chandan M Devireddy
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Outcomes, readmissions, and costs in transfemoral and alterative access transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the US Medicare population.

Authors:  Fenton H McCarthy; Danielle D Spragan; Danielle Savino; Taylor Dibble; Ashley C Hoedt; Katherine M McDermott; Joseph E Bavaria; Howard C Herrmann; Saif Anwaruddin; Jay Giri; Wilson Y Szeto; Peter W Groeneveld; Nimesh D Desai
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis at Intermediate Risk.

Authors:  Suzanne J Baron; Kaijun Wang; John A House; Elizabeth A Magnuson; Matthew R Reynolds; Raj Makkar; Howard C Herrmann; Susheel Kodali; Vinod H Thourani; Samir Kapadia; Lars Svensson; Michael J Mack; David L Brown; Mark J Russo; Craig R Smith; John Webb; Craig Miller; Martin B Leon; David J Cohen
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2019-02-12       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Comparison of Outcomes of Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Using a Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Strategy.

Authors:  Guilherme F Attizzani; Ahmad Alkhalil; Bimal Padaliya; Chor-Cheung Tam; Joao Pedro Lopes; Anas Fares; Hiram G Bezerra; Benjamin Medallion; Soon Park; Salil Deo; Basar Sareyyupoglu; Sahil Parikh; David Zidar; Yakov Elgudin; Kehllee Popovich; Angela Davis; Elizabeth Staunton; Ana Tomic; Stacey Mazzurco; Edward Avery; Alan Markowitz; Daniel I Simon; Marco A Costa
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  The Vancouver 3M (Multidisciplinary, Multimodality, But Minimalist) Clinical Pathway Facilitates Safe Next-Day Discharge Home at Low-, Medium-, and High-Volume Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Centers: The 3M TAVR Study.

Authors:  David A Wood; Sandra B Lauck; John A Cairns; Karin H Humphries; Richard Cook; Robert Welsh; Jonathon Leipsic; Philippe Genereux; Robert Moss; John Jue; Philipp Blanke; Anson Cheung; Jian Ye; Danny Dvir; Hamed Umedaly; Rael Klein; Kevin Rondi; Rohan Poulter; Dion Stub; Marco Barbanti; Peter Fahmy; Nay Htun; Dale Murdoch; Roshan Prakash; Madeleine Barker; Kevin Nickel; Jay Thakkar; Janarthanan Sathananthan; Ben Tyrell; Faisal Al-Qoofi; James L Velianou; Madhu K Natarajan; Harindra C Wijeysundera; Sam Radhakrishnan; Eric Horlick; Mark Osten; Christopher Buller; Mark Peterson; Anita Asgar; Donald Palisaitis; Jean-Bernard Masson; Susheel Kodali; Tamim Nazif; Vinod Thourani; Vasilis C Babaliaros; David J Cohen; Julie E Park; Martin B Leon; John G Webb
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2019-03-11       Impact factor: 11.195

6.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement outcomes in Japan: Optimized CathEter vAlvular iNtervention (OCEAN) Japanese multicenter registry.

Authors:  Masanori Yamamoto; Yusuke Watanabe; Norio Tada; Toru Naganuma; Motoharu Araki; Futoshi Yamanaka; Kazuki Mizutani; Minoru Tabata; Hiroshi Ueno; Kensuke Takagi; Akihiro Higashimori; Shinichi Shirai; Kentaro Hayashida
Journal:  Cardiovasc Revasc Med       Date:  2018-12-04

7.  A pathway to earlier discharge following TAVI: Assessment of safety and resource utilization.

Authors:  Rebecca L Noad; Nicola Johnston; Andrew McKinley; Mark Dougherty; O C Nzewi; Reuben Jeganathan; Ganesh Manoharan; Mark S Spence
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2015-05-23       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Contemporary Costs Associated With Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Medicare Beneficiaries.

Authors:  Suzanne J Baron; Michael P Ryan; Kimberly A Moore; Seth J Clancy; Candace L Gunnarsson
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 6.546

Review 9.  STS-ACC TVT Registry of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  John D Carroll; Michael J Mack; Sreekanth Vemulapalli; Howard C Herrmann; Thomas G Gleason; George Hanzel; G Michael Deeb; Vinod H Thourani; David J Cohen; Nimesh Desai; Ajay J Kirtane; Susan Fitzgerald; Joan Michaels; Carole Krohn; Frederick A Masoudi; Ralph G Brindis; Joseph E Bavaria
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  Comparison of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement performed in the catheterization laboratory (minimalist approach) versus hybrid operating room (standard approach): outcomes and cost analysis.

Authors:  Vasilis Babaliaros; Chandan Devireddy; Stamatios Lerakis; Robert Leonardi; Sebastian A Iturra; Kreton Mavromatis; Bradley G Leshnower; Robert A Guyton; Mihir Kanitkar; Patricia Keegan; Amy Simone; James P Stewart; Nima Ghasemzadeh; Peter Block; Vinod H Thourani
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 11.195

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.