Minimally Invasive vs Open Coronary Surgery: A Multi-Institutional Analysis of Cost and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Limited multi-institutional data evaluating minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) outcomes have raised concern for increased resource utilization compared with standard sternotomy. The purpose of this study was to assess short-term outcomes and resource utilization with MICS CABG in a propensity-matched regional cohort.

METHODS

Isolated CABG patients (2012-2019) were extracted from a regional Society of Thoracic Surgeons database. Patients were stratified by MICS CABG vs open CABG via sternotomy, propensity-score matched 1:2 to balance baseline differences, and compared by univariate analysis.

RESULTS

Of 26,255 isolated coronary artery bypass graft patients, 139 MICS CABG and 278 open CABG patients were well balanced after matching. There was no difference in the operative mortality rate (2.2% open vs 0.7% MICS CABG, P = .383) or major morbidity (7.9% open vs 7.2% MICS CABG, P = .795). However, open CABG patients received more blood products (22.2% vs 12.2%, P = .013), and had longer intensive care unit (45 vs 30 hours, P = .049) as well as hospital lengths of stay (7 vs 6 days, P = .005). Finally, median hospital cost was significantly higher in the open CABG group ($35,011 vs $27,906, P < .001) compared with MICS CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

Open CABG via sternotomy and MICS CABG approaches are associated with similar, excellent perioperative outcomes. However, MICS CABG was associated with fewer transfusions, shorter length of stay, and ∼$7000 lower hospital cost, a superior resource utilization profile that improves patient care and lowers cost.

Cost of Thoracotomy Approach: An Analysis of the LATERAL Trial

BACKGROUND

Less invasive techniques for left ventricular assist device implantation have been increasingly prevalent over past years and have been associated with improved clinical outcomes. The procedural economic impact of these techniques remains unknown. We sought to study and report economic outcomes associated with the thoracotomy implantation approach.

METHODS

The LATERAL clinical trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the thoracotomy approach for implantation of the HeartWare centrifugal-flow ventricular assist device system (HVAD). We collected UB-04 forms in parallel to the trial, allowing analysis of index hospitalization costs. All charges were converted to costs using hospital-specific cost-to-charge ratios and were subsequently compared with Medicare cost data for the same period (2015-2016). Because thoracotomy implants were off-label for all left ventricular assist devices during that period, the Medicare cohort was assumed to consist predominately of traditional sternotomy patients.

RESULTS

Thoracotomy patients demonstrated decreased costs compared with sternotomy patients during the index hospitalization. Mean total index hospitalization costs for thoracotomy were $204,107 per patient, corresponding to 21.6% reduction (P < .001) and $56,385 savings per procedure compared with sternotomy. Across almost all cost categories, thoracotomy implants were less costly.

CONCLUSIONS

In LATERAL, a clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of the thoracotomy approach for HVAD, costs were lower than those reported in Medicare patient claims occurring over the same period. Because Medicare data can be presumed to consist of predominately sternotomy procedures, thoracotomy appears less expensive than traditional sternotomy.

Automated Titanium Fasteners Versus Hand-Tied Knots: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The relative benefits of automated titanium fasteners (LSI Solutions, Victor, NY) have not been examined in patients undergoing sternotomy. The aim of this study was to assess the time and cost required for suture fixation with the automated device versus conventional hand tying in sternotomy for mitral or tricuspid ring annuloplasty.

METHODS

Fifty patients scheduled to undergo primary mitral or tricuspid, or both, ring annuloplasty-based valve repair operation by a single surgeon were randomly assigned to receive either conventional hand-tied knots or automated titanium fasteners, with 25 patients in each group. The primary outcome variable was the time required to affix the annuloplasty device to the valve annulus.

RESULTS

The times taken to affix a mitral annuloplasty band or ring were 6.1 ± 0.9 min for manual tying versus 3.1 ± 0.4 min for automated fasteners (p < 0.0001); when calculated per annuloplasty stitch, the values were 22 ± 2 s versus 12 ± 1.1 s, respectively (p < 0.0001). The corresponding values for tricuspid annuloplasty were 4.2 ± 1.2 min (hand tying) versus 2.2 ± 0.3 min (automated fasteners) (p = 0.0005), and the times for each suture were 20 ± 2.1 s versus 13 ± 2 s, respectively (p = 0.0004). The use of the automated fastener had no significant impact on aortic cross-clamp time or cardiopulmonary bypass duration. Total cost associated with annuloplasty fixation with automated titanium fasteners (device cost in addition to operating room time cost) was significantly higher than with hand tying ($1,190 ± 374 vs $164 ± 60; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the automated fastener to facilitate annuloplasty fixation through a sternotomy resulted in a small procedural time savings (average of 10 s/stitch) that had no overall impact on cardiopulmonary bypass or cross-clamp times but added an average cost of $1,026 to the operation.

Retrospective comparison of costs between medical and surgical treatment of canine pyothorax

This study compared costs of treating dogs with pyothorax medically versus surgically. Medical records from the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine were searched for cases of pyothorax that underwent either medical or surgical treatment. Patients undergoing surgery were subdivided into early (ES; < 48 h) and late (LS; > 48 h) surgery groups. Costs and length of stay were compared between treatment groups. Treatment costs were adjusted for inflation. Nineteen dogs were included in analysis; 7 in the medical group (MG), 5 in the ES group, and 7 in the LS group. Total costs were significantly lower in the MG than in the LS group. Total costs were less for the MG than the ES group, and for ES than LS, but the differences did not achieve significance. Preoperative costs were higher in the LS than the ES group. We conclude that surgery for canine pyothorax is less costly if pursued earlier than later.

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is associated with equivalent cost and shorter hospital stay when compared with traditional sternotomy

OBJECTIVE

Mitral valve surgery is increasingly performed through minimally invasive approaches. There are limited data regarding the cost of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. Moreover, there are no data on the specific costs associated with mitral valve surgery. We undertook this study to compare the costs (total and subcomponent) of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery relative to traditional sternotomy.

METHODS

All isolated mitral valve repairs performed in our health system from March 2012 through September 2013 were analyzed. To ensure like sets of patients, only those patients who underwent isolated mitral valve repairs with preoperative Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores of less than 4 were included in this study. A total of 159 patients were identified (sternotomy, 68; mini, 91). Total incurred direct cost was obtained from hospital financial records.

RESULTS

Analysis demonstrated no difference in total cost (operative and postoperative) of mitral valve repair between mini and sternotomy ($25,515 ± $7598 vs $26,049 ± $11,737; P = .74). Operative costs were higher for the mini cohort, whereas postoperative costs were significantly lower. Postoperative intensive care unit and total hospital stays were both significantly shorter for the mini cohort. There were no differences in postoperative complications or survival between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery can be performed with overall equivalent cost and shorter hospital stay relative to traditional sternotomy. There is greater operative cost associated with minimally invasive mitral valve surgery that is offset by shorter intensive care unit and hospital stays.

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Ministernotomy Versus Minithoracotomy Approach

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement via ministernotomy (ministernotomy-AVR) or minithoracotomy (minithoracotomy-AVR) is gaining popularity. To date, a direct comparison of ministernotomy-AVR versus minithoracotomy-AVR is lacking. The study aim was to compare these two procedures from a cost-benefit perspective.

METHODS

Eight reports from the United States were selected from amongst 33,494 literature citations based on sample size and data completeness. Perioperative variables were collected for each surgical approach. Fixed and variable costs were estimated as cost per case in excess of full sternotomy AVR procedures.

RESULTS

Ministernotomy-AVR patients were of a significantly lower mean age (59.8 years versus 67.9 years), ejection fraction (50.4-51.6% versus 56.1-57.8%), shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time (97.2 min versus 125.6 min) and cross-clamp time (69.9 min versus 87.9 min), a lower rate of blood transfusion (25.9% versus 64.4%), and a shorter length of hospital stay (5.7 versus 6.2 days). There were no significant inter-group differences in 30-day mortality, conversion to sternotomy, neurologic events, arrhythmia, wound infection, or postoperative bleeding. Assuming a volume of 50 cases per year, the added operative cost per case for a minithoracotomy-AVR was US$ 4,254 compared to US$ 290 for a ministernotomy-AVR. The added costs per case, assuming 200 cases per year, were US$ 4,209 and US$ 290, respectively. A minithoracotomy-AVR program performing 50 cases per year adds US$ 1,063,665 of operative costs over five years, compared to US$ 72,500 for a ministernotomy-AVR program.

CONCLUSION

The present analysis suggested that the clinical benefits of ministernotomy-AVR are comparable or better than those of minithoracotomy-AVR, and at lower costs. Healthcare delivery organizations should consider the results of cost-benefit examinations when developing surgical valve replacement programs.

Right anterior thoracotomy aortic valve replacement is associated with less cost than sternotomy-based approaches: a multi-institution analysis of 'real world' data

BACKGROUND

Large institutional analyses demonstrating outcomes of right anterior mini-thoracotomy (RAT) for isolated aortic valve replacement (isoAVR) do not exist. In this study, a group of cardiac surgeons who routinely perform minimally invasive isoAVR analyzed a cross-section of US hospital records in order to analyze outcomes of RAT as compared to sternotomy.

METHODS

The Premier database was queried from 2007-2011 for clinical and cost data for patients undergoing isoAVR. This de-identified database contains billing, hospital cost, and coding data from >600 US facilities with information from >25 million inpatient discharges. Expert rules were developed to identify patients with RAT and those with any sternal incision (aStern). Propensity matching created groups adjusted for patient differences. The impact of surgical approach on outcomes and costs was modeled using regression analysis and, where indicated, adjusting for hospital size and geographical differences.

RESULTS

AVR was performed in 27,051 patients. Analysis identified isoAVR by RAT (n = 1572) and by aStern (n = 3962). Propensity matching created two groups of 921 patients. RAT was more likely performed in southern hospitals (63% vs 36%; p < 0.01), teaching hospitals (66% vs 58%; p < 0.01) and larger hospitals (47% vs 30%; p < 0.01). There was significantly less blood product cost associated with RAT ($1381 vs $1912; p < 0.001). After adjusting for hospital differences, RAT was associated with lower cost than aStern ($38,769 vs $42,656; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes analyses can be performed from hospital administrative collective databases. This real world analysis demonstrates comparable outcomes and less cost and ICU time with RAT for AVR.

A minimally invasive approach is more cost-effective than a traditional sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the cost and effectiveness of a minimally invasive (MI) versus traditional sternotomy (ST) approach for mitral valve surgery (MVS).

METHODS

From January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2008, a total of 847 patients underwent isolated MVS at our institution. Propensity matching on 22 clinical variables was carried out to generate a study cohort of 434 patients (217 matched pairs). Direct and indirect costs from the hospital perspective were retrospectively obtained from our finance department. Total hospital costs were further stratified into 13 standardized institutional billing categories. In addition, data on morbidity, mortality, discharge location, hospital readmissions within 1 year, and freedom from reoperation were obtained.

RESULTS

Compared with ST, MIMVS was associated with a $9054 ± $3302 lower mean total hospital cost (P = .006), driven largely by a reduction in direct (P = .003) versus indirect costs (P = .06). Among the 13 billing categories, MIMVS was associated with a significant reduction in costs of cardiac imaging (P = .004), laboratory tests (P = .005), boarding and nursing (P = .001), and radiology (P = .002). More patients in the ST group required intubation for more than 72 hours (P = .019); however, there were no differences in morbidity or long-term survival (P = .334). A higher proportion of MI patients were discharged home with no nursing services (P = .018), and a higher proportion of ST patients required readmission within 1 year (P = .023). There were no differences in freedom from reoperation between groups (P = .574).

CONCLUSIONS

With equivalent efficacy across a range of measures and lower costs compared with ST, MIMVS represents a cost-saving strategy for MVS.