RESUMEN
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Patients presenting with ischemic brain symptoms have widely variable outcomes dependent to some degree on the pathologic basis of their stroke syndrome. The purpose of this study was to determine the cost implications of the emergency use of a computed tomographic (CT) protocol comprising unenhanced CT, head and neck CT angiography, and whole-brain CT perfusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: By using a retrospective patient database from a tertiary care facility and publicly available cost data, the authors derived the potential savings from the use of CT angiography. CT perfusion, or both at hospital arrival by means of a cost model. The cost of the CT angiography-CT perfusion protocol was determined from Medicare reimbursement rates and compared with that of traditional imaging protocols. Cost savings were estimated as a decrease in the length of stay for most stroke patients, whereas the most benign (lacunar) strokes were assumed to be managed in a non-acute setting. Misdiagnosis cost (erroneously not admitting a patient with nonlacunar stroke) was calculated as the cost of a severe complication. Sensitivity testing included varying the percentage of misdiagnosed patients and admitting patients with lacunar stroke. RESULTS: The nationwide net savings that would result from the adoption of the CT angiography-CT perfusion protocol are in the $1.2 billion range (-$154 million to $2.1 billion) when patients with lacunar strokes are treated nonacutely and $1.8 billion when those patients are admitted for acute care. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate the potential effect of implementing a CT angiography-CT perfusion protocol. In particular, prompt CT angiography-CT perfusion imaging could have an effect on the cost of acute care in the treatment of stroke.
Asunto(s)
Angiografía Cerebral/economía , Accidente Cerebrovascular/diagnóstico por imagen , Accidente Cerebrovascular/economía , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/economía , Ahorro de Costo , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate patient discharge destination after elective endovascular or open surgical repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm and to determine predictors for discharge to home or to a rehabilitation center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients electively treated for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm with endovascular repair (n = 182) or open surgery (n = 274) between January 1997 and September 1999 were included. From the hospital database, information on discharge destination, patient characteristics, complications, and length of stay was retrieved. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors for discharge to home or to a rehabilitation center. RESULTS: Patient characteristics did not differ significantly between the treatment groups, with the exception of age (mean age, 75.1 vs 72.9 years in the endovascular and open surgical group, respectively; P =.005). Patient discharge destinations differed significantly between the treatment groups (P =.001). After endovascular procedures, 156 (85.7%) of 182 patients went home and 19 (10.4%) of 182 patients went to a rehabilitation center. After open surgery, 187 (68.2%) of 274 patients went home and 64 (23.4%) of 274 patients went to a rehabilitation center. The odds ratio of discharge to a rehabilitation center, instead of home, following endovascular procedures versus open surgery was 0.23 (95% CI: 0.13, 0.43). CONCLUSION: Following elective repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm, significantly more patients went home after an endovascular procedure than after open surgery. Procedure type was a significant predictor of discharge destination.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Alta del Paciente , Anciano , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Riñón , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Centros de Rehabilitación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To determine and compare the average in-hospital costs of elective open surgical and endovascular repairs of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Total actual cost data for patients undergoing elective endovascular (n = 181) or open surgical (n = 273) repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms between 1997 and 1999 were retrieved. The mean total hospital cost (including stent-graft costs and excluding attending physician fees) and mean postoperative length of stay were calculated for each treatment group. Costs were expressed in 1999 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: Endovascular repair yielded a shorter postoperative length of stay than did open surgery (mean stay, 3.4 vs 8.0 days; P <.001) and a lower proportion of patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit for 1 full day or longer (2.8% vs 36.3%; P <.001). The mean total hospital cost was significantly higher for endovascular repair than for open surgery ($20,716 vs $18,484; P <.001). CONCLUSION: Hospital costs were higher for endovascular repair than for open surgical repair. However, endovascular repair was associated with a decreased length of stay and fewer intensive care unit admissions. The increased mean hospital cost for endovascular repair was smaller than one would expect, considering the higher costs of endovascular grafts, as compared with those for surgical grafts (approximately $6,400 according to literature data).