National trends in the utilization of short-term mechanical circulatory support: incidence, outcomes, and cost analysis
Robert Stretch, Christopher M Sauer, David D Yuh, Pramod Bonde, Robert Stretch, Christopher M Sauer, David D Yuh, Pramod Bonde
Abstract
Background: The number of alternatives to intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in the treatment of anticipated and established acute circulatory failure is growing. Despite the clinical importance and significant cost of short-term mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, the state of their present use has not been analyzed on a national scale.
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to characterize the demographics, treatment practices, survival rates, and cost of short-term MCS.
Methods: In this serial cross-sectional study, we analyzed all adult patients receiving short-term MCS in the United States from 2004 to 2011 by using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project.
Results: From 2007 to 2011, use of percutaneous devices for short-term MCS increased by 1,511% compared with a 101% increase in nonpercutaneous devices. Mortality rates declined over this period (p for trend = 0.027) from 41.1% in 2004 to 2007 to 33.4% in 2008 to 2011. A similar trend was observed for the subset of patients with cardiogenic shock, decreasing from 51.6% to 43.1% (p for trend = 0.012). Hospital costs also declined over this period (p for trend = 0.011). Multivariable analysis revealed balloon pumps (odds ratio [OR]: 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.58 to 2.52), coagulopathy (OR: 2.35; 95% CI: 1.88 to 2.94), and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR: 3.50; 95% CI: 2.20 to 5.57) before short-term MCS were among the most significant predictors of mortality.
Conclusions: Use of short-term MCS in the United States has increased rapidly, whereas rates of in-hospital mortality have decreased. These changes have taken place in the context of declining hospital costs associated with short-term MCS.
Keywords: heart failure; left ventricular assist device; percutaneous devices; shock.
Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Source: PubMed