Association of Clinical Setting With Sociodemographics and Outcomes Following Endovascular Femoropopliteal Artery Revascularization in the United States

Device regulation and surveillance in vascular care: Challenges and opportunities

Cardiovascular devices are essential for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases including cerebrovascular, coronary, valvular, congenital, peripheral vascular and arrhythmic diseases. The regulation and surveillance of vascular devices in real-world practice, however, presents challenges during each individual product's life cycle. Four examples illustrate recent challenges and questions regarding safety, appropriate use and efficacy arising from FDA approved devices used in real-world practice. We outline potential pathways wherein providers, regulators and payors could potentially provide high-quality cardiovascular care, identify safety signals, ensure equitable device access, and study potential issues with devices in real-world practice.

Practice patterns of peripheral vascular interventions for peripheral artery disease in the office-based laboratory setting versus outpatient hospital

OBJECTIVE

Controversy exists regarding the value and limitations of different sites of service for peripheral artery disease treatment. We aimed to examine practice patterns associated with peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) performed in the office-based laboratory (OBL) vs outpatient hospital site of service using a nationally representative database.

METHODS

Using 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims data, we identified all patients undergoing PVI for claudication or chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) between January 2017 and December 2022. We evaluated the associations of patient and procedure characteristics with site of service using multivariable hierarchical logistic regression. We used multinomial regression models to estimate the relative risk ratios (RRRs) of site of service and intervention type (angioplasty, stent, or atherectomy) and intervention anatomic level (iliac, femoropopliteal, or tibial) after adjusting for baseline patient characteristics and clustering by physician.

RESULTS

Of 848,526 PVI, 485,942 (57.3%) were performed in an OBL. OBL use increased significantly over time from 48.3% in 2017 to 65.5% in 2022 (P < .001). Patients treated in OBLs were more likely to be Black (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.18) or other non-White race (aOR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18), have fewer comorbidities, and undergo treatment for claudication vs CLTI (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.26-1.33) compared with patients treated in outpatient hospital settings. Physicians with majority practice (>50% procedures) in an OBL were more likely to practice in urban settings (aOR, 21.58; 95% CI, 9.31-50.02), specialize in radiology (aOR, 18.15; 95% CI, 8.92- 36.92), and have high-volume PVI practices (aOR, 2.15; 95% CI, 2.10-2.29). The median time from diagnosis to treatment was shorter in OBLs, particularly for patients with CLTI (29 vs 39 days; P < .001). The OBL setting was the strongest predictor of patients receiving an atherectomy alone (adjusted RRR [aRRR] 6.67; 95% CI, 6.59-6.76) or atherectomy + stent (aRRR, 10.84; 95% CI, 10.64-11.05), and these findings were consistent in subgroup analyses stratified by PVI indication. The OBL setting was also associated with higher risk of tibial interventions for both claudication (aRRR, 3.18; 95% CI, 3.11-3.25) and CLTI (aRRR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.86-1.92). The average reimbursement (including professional and facility fees) was slightly higher for OBLs compared with the hospital ($8742/case vs $8459/case; P < .001). However, in a simulated cohort resetting the OBL's intervention type distribution to that of the hospital, OBLs were associated with a hypothetical cost savings of $221,219,803 overall and $2602 per case.

CONCLUSIONS

The OBL site of service was associated with greater access to care for non-White patients and a shorter time from diagnosis to treatment, but more frequently performed high-cost interventions compared with the outpatient hospital setting. The benefit to patients from improved access to peripheral artery disease care in OBL settings must be balanced with the potential limitations of receiving differential care.

Co-Morbidity Differences Associated With Long-Term Amputation and Repeat Revascularization Rates After Femoropopliteal Artery Intervention for Intermittent Claudication by Sex, Race, and Ethnicity

Use of peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) for intermittent claudication (IC) continues to expand, but there is uncertainty whether baseline demographics, procedural techniques and outcomes differ by sex, race, and ethnicity. This study aimed to examine amputation and revascularization rates up to 4 years after femoropopliteal (FP) PVI for IC by sex, race, and ethnicity. Patients who underwent FP PVI for IC between 2016 and 2020 from the PINC AI Healthcare Database were analyzed. The primary outcome was any index limb amputation, assessed by Kaplan-Meier estimate. Secondary outcomes included index limb major amputation, repeat revascularization, and index limb repeat revascularization. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazard regression models. This study included 19,324 patients with IC who underwent FP PVI, with 41.2% women, 15.6% Black patients, and 4.7% Hispanic patients. Women were less likely than men to be treated with atherectomy (45.1% vs 47.8%, p = 0.0003); Black patients were more likely than White patients to receive atherectomy (50.7% vs 44.9%, p <0.001), and Hispanic patients were less likely than non-Hispanic patients to receive atherectomy (41% vs 47%, p = 0.0004). Unadjusted rates of any amputation were similar in men and women (6.4% for each group, log-rank p = 0.842), higher in Black patients than in White patients (7.8% vs 6.1%, log-rank p = 0.007), and higher in Hispanic patients than in non-Hispanic patients (8.8% vs 6.3%, log-rank p = 0.031). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, Black race was associated with higher rates of repeat revascularization (adjusted HR 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.22) and any FP revascularization (adjusted HR 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.20). No statistical difference in amputation rate was observed among comparison groups. Women and men with IC had similar crude and adjusted amputation and revascularization outcomes after FP PVI. Black patients had higher repeat revascularization and any FP revascularization rates than did White patients. Black and Hispanic patients had higher crude amputation rates, but these differences were attenuated by adjustment for baseline characteristics. Black patients were more likely to receive atherectomy and had higher rates of any repeat revascularization and specifically FP revascularization. Further study is necessary to determine whether these patterns are related to disease-specific issues or practice-pattern differences among different populations.