Registries, Risk Calculators, and Risk-Adjusted Outcomes: Current Usage, Limitations, and Future Prospects

Comparing apples to apples: Exploring public reporting of congenital cardiac surgery outcomes based on common congenital heart operations

OBJECTIVE

We sought to simplify reporting of outcomes in congenital heart surgery that compares well-defined patient groups and accommodates multiple stakeholder needs while being easily understandable.

METHODS

We selected 19 commonly performed congenital heart surgeries ranging in complexity from repair of atrial septal defects to the Norwood procedure. Strict inclusion/exclusion criteria ensured the creation of 19 well-defined diagnosis/procedure cohorts. Preoperative, procedural, and postoperative data were collected for consecutive eligible patients from 9 centers between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021. Unadjusted operative mortality rates and hospital length of stay for each of the 19 diagnosis/procedure cohorts were summarized in aggregate and stratified by each center.

RESULTS

Of 8572 eligible cases included, numbers in the 19 diagnosis/procedure cohorts ranged from 73 for tetralogy of Fallot repair after previous palliation to 1224 for ventricular septal defect (VSD) repair for isolated VSD. In aggregate, the unadjusted mortality ranged from 0% for atrial septal defect repair to 28.4% for hybrid stage I. There was significant heterogeneity in case mix and mortality for different diagnosis/procedure cohorts across centers (eg, arterial switch operation/VSD, n = 7-42, mortality 0%-7.4%; Norwood procedure, n = 16-122, mortality 5.3%-25%).

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting of institutional case volumes and outcomes within well-defined diagnosis/procedure cohorts can enable centers to benchmark outcomes, understand trends in mortality, and direct quality improvement. When made public, this type of report could provide parents with information on institutional volumes and outcomes and allow them to better understand the experience of each program with operations for specific congenital heart defects.

Congenital Cardiac Catheterization in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: The International Quality Improvement Collaborative Catheterization Registry

Background

No published data are available on the patient, procedural characteristics, and outcomes of congenital heart disease (CHD) cardiac catheterization performed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Objectives

The objective of this study was to describe procedural characteristics and patient outcomes of CHD cardiac catheterizations in LMICs.

Methods

Cases performed between January 2019 and December 2020 from 15 centers in the International Quality Improvement Collaborative Congenital Heart Disease Catheterization Registry (IQIC-CHDCR) data were included. The Procedural Risk in Congenital Cardiac Catheterization (PREDIC3T) classification was used to stratify risk. Outcomes of interest included mortality, severe adverse events (SAEs), and procedural efficacy. Procedural efficacy, based on technical and safety endpoints, was categorized into optimal, adequate, and inadequate for 5 common interventional procedures.

Results

There were 3,287 cases, of which 60% (n = 1,973) were interventional cases. Most of the cases (66%) were in patients between the ages of 1 to 18 years with a median patient age of 4 years. PREDIC3T risk class 1 and 2 were most common in 37% and 38% of cases, respectively. SAEs occurred in 2.8% while the death was reported within <72 hours post catheterization 1%. The majority of device implantation procedures patent ductus arteriosus (67%) and atrial septal defect (60%) had optimal procedure efficacy outcomes.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that congenital cardiac catheterization is safely performed in LMICs. Future work addressing predictors of SAEs and adverse procedural outcomes may help future quality improvement initiatives.

Prevention of Prosthetic Joint Infection: From Traditional Approaches towards Quality Improvement and Data Mining

A projected increased use of total joint arthroplasties will naturally result in a related increase in the number of prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Suppression of the local peri-implant immune response counters efforts to eradicate bacteria, allowing the formation of biofilms and compromising preventive measures taken in the operating room. For these reasons, the prevention of PJI should focus concurrently on the following targets: (i) identifying at-risk patients; (ii) reducing “bacterial load” perioperatively; (iii) creating an antibacterial/antibiofilm environment at the site of surgery; and (iv) stimulating the local immune response. Despite considerable recent progress made in experimental and clinical research, a large discrepancy persists between proposed and clinically implemented preventative strategies. The ultimate anti-infective strategy lies in an optimal combination of all preventative approaches into a single “clinical pack”, applied rigorously in all settings involving prosthetic joint implantation. In addition, “anti-infective” implants might be a choice in patients who have an increased risk for PJI. However, further progress in the prevention of PJI is not imaginable without a close commitment to using quality improvement tools in combination with continual data mining, reflecting the efficacy of the preventative strategy in a particular clinical setting.