Literature DB >> 9565008

Variation in carotid endarterectomy mortality in the Medicare population: trial hospitals, volume, and patient characteristics.

D E Wennberg1, F L Lucas, J D Birkmeyer, C E Bredenberg, E S Fisher.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) and the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS) demonstrated the efficacy of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in reducing the risk of stroke and death in selected patients when surgery was performed in institutions whose participation depended on demonstrated excellence. Thirty-day mortality rates in the trials were very low: 0.6% in NASCET and 0.1% in ACAS.
OBJECTIVE: To assess perioperative mortality among Medicare patients undergoing CEA in all nonfederal institutional settings.
DESIGN: Retrospective national cohort study. SETTING AND PATIENTS: All 113300 Medicare patients undergoing CEA during 1992 and 1993 in "trial hospitals" (those participating in NASCET and ACAS, n=86) and "nontrial hospitals" (all other nonfederal institutions performing CEAs, n=2613). Nontrial hospitals were stratified into terciles based on volume of CEAs performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Crude and adjusted perioperative (30 day) mortality rates.
RESULTS: The perioperative mortality rate was 1.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2%-1.7%) at trial hospitals; mortality in nontrial hospitals was higher: 1.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-1.8%) (high volume); 1.9% (95% CI, 1.7%-2.1 %) (average volume); 2.5% (95% CI, 2.0%-2.9%) (low volume); (P for trend, <.001). In multivariate modeling, patients undergoing their procedures at trial hospitals had a mortality risk reduction of 15% (95% CI, 0%-31%) compared with high-volume nontrial hospitals, 25% (95% CI, 7%-40%) compared with average-volume hospitals, and 43% (95% CI, 25%-56%) compared with low-volume hospitals (P for trend, <.001).
CONCLUSION: Medicare patients' perioperative mortality following CEA is substantially higher than that reported in the trials, even in those institutions that participated in the randomized studies. Caution is advised in translating the efficacy of carefully controlled studies of CEA to effectiveness in everyday practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9565008     DOI: 10.1001/jama.279.16.1278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  82 in total

1.  Relation of surgical volume to outcome in eight common operations: results from the VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Authors:  S F Khuri; J Daley; W Henderson; K Hur; M Hossain; D Soybel; K W Kizer; J B Aust; R H Bell; V Chong; J Demakis; P J Fabri; J O Gibbs; F Grover; K Hammermeister; G McDonald; E Passaro; L Phillips; F Scamman; J Spencer; J F Stremple
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 2.  Treatment of atherosclerotic disease at the cervical carotid bifurcation: current status and review of the literature.

Authors:  J J Connors; D Seidenwurm; J C Wojak; R W Hurst; M E Jensen; R Wallace; T Tomsick; J Barr; C Kerber; E Russell; G M Nesbit; A J Fox; F Y Tsai
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Carotid artery stenting: technical considerations.

Authors:  J J Vitek; G S Roubin; N Al-Mubarek; G New; S S Iyer
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 4.  Cerebrovascular angioplasty and stenting for the prevention of stroke.

Authors:  J C Chaloupka; J B Weigele; S Mangla; W S Lesley
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 5.081

Review 5.  Evidence based cardiology: Prevention of ischaemic stroke.

Authors:  H J Barnett; M Eliasziw; H E Meldrum
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-06-05

6.  Hospital resource use following carotid endarterectomy in 2006: analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample.

Authors:  Kate C Young; Babak S Jahromi; Michael J Singh; Karl A Illig; Curtis G Benesch
Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 2.136

7.  Age differential between outcomes of carotid angioplasty and stent placement and carotid endarterectomy in general practice.

Authors:  Rakesh Khatri; Saqib A Chaudhry; Gabriela Vazquez; Gustavo J Rodriguez; Ameer E Hassan; M Fareed K Suri; Adnan I Qureshi
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 4.268

8.  Ischemic Stroke Prevention.

Authors: 
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Neurol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 3.598

9.  Predictors of neurocognitive decline after carotid endarterectomy.

Authors:  J Mocco; David A Wilson; Ricardo J Komotar; Joseph Zurica; William J Mack; Hadi J Halazun; Raheleh Hatami; Robert R Sciacca; E Sander Connolly; Eric J Heyer
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.654

10.  Quality improvement guidelines for the performance of cervical carotid angioplasty and stent placement.

Authors:  John D Barr; John J Connors; David Sacks; Joan C Wojak; Gary J Becker; John F Cardella; Bohdan Chopko; Jacques E Dion; Allan J Fox; Randall T Higashida; Robert W Hurst; Curtis A Lewis; Terence A S Matalon; Gary M Nesbit; J Arliss Pollock; Eric J Russell; David J Seidenwurm; Robert C Wallace
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2003 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.825

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.