Effect of Hospital Volume on Prosthesis Use and Mortality in Aortic Valve Operations in the Elderly

Association of Volume and Outcomes in 234,556 Patients Undergoing Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

The relationship between institutional volume and operative mortality following SAVR remains unclear.

METHODS

From 1/2013 to 6/2018, 234,556 patients underwent isolated SAVR (n=144,177) or SAVR+CABG (n=90,379) within the STS ACSD. The association between annualized SAVR volume [Group 1 (1-25 SAVR), Group 2 (26-50 SAVR), Group 3 (51-100 SAVR), and Group 4 (>100 SAVR)] and operative mortality and composite major morbidity/mortality was assessed. Random effects models were used to evaluate whether historic (2013-2015) SAVR volume or risk-adjusted outcomes explained future (2016-2018) risk-adjusted outcomes.

RESULTS

The annualized median number of SAVRs per site was 35 [IQR: 22-59, isolated AVR: 20, AVR+CABG: 13]. Among isolated SAVR cases, the mean operative mortality and composite morbidity/mortality were 1.5% and 9.7%, respectively, at the highest volume sites (Group 4); with significantly higher rates among progressively lower volume groups (p-trend<0.001). After adjustment, lower volume centers experienced increased odds of operative mortality [Group 1 vs. 4 (Ref): AOR (SAVR), 2.24 (1.91-2.64); AOR (SAVR+CABG), 1.96 (1.67-2.30)] and major morbidity/mortality [AOR (SAVR), 1.53 (1.39-1.69); AOR (SAVR+CABG), 1.46 (1.32-1.61)] compared to the highest volume institutions. Substantial variation in outcomes was observed across hospitals within each volume category and prior outcomes explained a greater proportion of hospital operative outcomes than prior volume.

CONCLUSIONS

Operative outcomes following SAVR±CABG is inversely associated with institutional procedure volumes; however, prior outcomes are more predictive than prior volume of future outcomes. Given excellent outcomes observed at many lower volume hospitals, procedural outcomes may be preferable to procedural volumes as a quality metric.

Contemporary trends in the management of aortic stenosis in the USA

AIMS

To assess the contemporary trends in aortic stenosis (AS) interventions in the USA before and after the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We utilized the National-Inpatient-Sample to assess temporal trends in the incidence, cost, and outcomes of AS interventions between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2016. During the study's period, AS interventions increased from 96 to 137 per 100 000 individuals > 60 years old, P < 0.001. In-hospital expenditure on AS interventions increased from $2.28 billion in 2003 to $4.33 in 2016 P < 0.001. Among patients who underwent aortic valve replacement, the proportion of TAVI increased from 11.9% in 2012 to 43.2% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Males and Hispanics had lower proportions of TAVI compared with females and White patients. Adjusted in-hospital mortality of isolated SAVR decreased from 5.4% in 2003 to 3.3% in 2016 (P < 0.001), whereas adjusted in-hospital mortality of TAVI decreased from 4.7% in 2012 to 2.2% in 2016, P < 0.001. The incidence of new dialysis, permanent pacemaker implantation, and blood transfusion decreased after both TAVI and SAVR between 2012 and 2016. However, the rate of post-operative stroke did not significantly decrease. Length of stay and cost of hospitalization decreased after both SAVR and TAVI, although the later remained higher with TAVI. Rates of non-home discharge decreased over time after TAVI but remained stable after isolated SAVR.

CONCLUSION

This nationwide survey documents the increasing incidence of AS interventions, the rising cost of modern AS care, and the paradigm shift in aortic valve replacement practice in the USA.

2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the valvular heart disease guideline provides recommendations for clinicians to diagnose and manage valvular heart disease as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to March 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Reports, and other selected database relevant to this guideline. Structure: Many recommendations from the earlier valvular heart disease guidelines have been updated with new evidence and provides newer options for diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease. This summary includes only the recommendations from the full guideline which focus on diagnostic work-up, the timing and choice of surgical and catheter interventions, and recommendations for medical therapy. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in developing these guidelines.

Relationship Between Hospital Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Volume and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine whether hospital surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) volume was associated with corresponding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated a volume-outcome relationship for TAVR.

METHODS

In total, 208,400 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries were analyzed for all aortic valve replacement procedures from 2012 to 2015. Claims for patients <65 years of age, concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, other heart valve procedures, or other major open heart procedures were excluded, as were secondary admissions for aortic valve replacement. Hospital SAVR volumes were stratified on the basis of mean annual SAVR procedures during the study period. The primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year post-operative TAVR survival. Adjusted survival following TAVR was assessed using multivariate Cox regression.

RESULTS

A total of 65,757 SAVR and 42,967 TAVR admissions were evaluated. Among TAVR procedures, 21.7% (n = 9,324) were performed at hospitals with <100 (group 1), 35.6% (n = 15,298) at centers with 100 to 199 (group 2), 22.9% (n = 9,828) at centers with 200 to 299 (group 3), and 19.8% (n = 8,517) at hospitals with ≥300 SAVR cases/year (group 4). Compared with group 4, 30-day TAVR mortality risk-adjusted odds ratios were 1.32 (95% confidence interval: 1.18 to 1.47) for group 1, 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 1.12 to 1.39) for group 2, and 1.08 (95% confidence interval: 0.82 to 1.25) for group 3. These adjusted survival differences in TAVR outcomes persisted at 1 year post-procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Total hospital SAVR volume appears to be correlated with TAVR outcomes, with higher 30-day and 1-year mortality observed at low-volume centers. These data support the importance of a viable surgical program within the heart team, and the use of minimum SAVR hospital thresholds may be considered as an additional metric for TAVR performance.