Cargando…

Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) involving landing zone 2 can require extra-anatomic debranching (SR-TEVAR) to ensure left subclavian artery perfusion, resulting in increased costs. A single-branch device (Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis [TBE], WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ) provides...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ramakrishnan, Ganesh, Beliveau, Lauren, Shinn, Kathryn, Gable, Cara, Brinkman, William, Shutze, William, Gable, Dennis
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10269387/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37334086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2023.2212585
_version_ 1785059161138003968
author Ramakrishnan, Ganesh
Beliveau, Lauren
Shinn, Kathryn
Gable, Cara
Brinkman, William
Shutze, William
Gable, Dennis
author_facet Ramakrishnan, Ganesh
Beliveau, Lauren
Shinn, Kathryn
Gable, Cara
Brinkman, William
Shutze, William
Gable, Dennis
author_sort Ramakrishnan, Ganesh
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) involving landing zone 2 can require extra-anatomic debranching (SR-TEVAR) to ensure left subclavian artery perfusion, resulting in increased costs. A single-branch device (Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis [TBE], WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ) provides a total endovascular solution. Comparative cost analysis of patients undergoing zone 2 TEVAR requiring left subclavian artery preservation with TBE versus SR-TEVAR is presented. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cost analysis was performed for aortic diseases requiring a zone 2 landing zone (TBE vs. SR-TEVAR) from 2014 to 2019. Facility charges were collected from the universal billing form UB-04 (form CMS 1450). RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included in each arm. There were no significant differences in the overall mean procedural charges between the two groups: TBE, $209,736 ($57,761) vs. SR-TEVAR $209,025 ($93,943), P = 0.94. TBE resulted in reduced operating room charges ($36,849 [$8750] vs. $48,073 [$10,825], P = 0.02) and reduced intensive care unit and telemetry room charges, which did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.23 and 0.12, respectively). Device/implant charges were the primary cost driver in both groups. Charges associated with TBE were significantly higher: $105,525 ($36,137) vs. $51,605 ($31,326), P > 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: TBE had similar overall procedural charges despite higher device/implant-related expenses and reduced facility resource utilization (lower operating room, intensive care unit, telemetry, and pharmacy charges).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10269387
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102693872023-06-16 Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease Ramakrishnan, Ganesh Beliveau, Lauren Shinn, Kathryn Gable, Cara Brinkman, William Shutze, William Gable, Dennis Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) Original Research: Cardiology BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) involving landing zone 2 can require extra-anatomic debranching (SR-TEVAR) to ensure left subclavian artery perfusion, resulting in increased costs. A single-branch device (Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis [TBE], WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ) provides a total endovascular solution. Comparative cost analysis of patients undergoing zone 2 TEVAR requiring left subclavian artery preservation with TBE versus SR-TEVAR is presented. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cost analysis was performed for aortic diseases requiring a zone 2 landing zone (TBE vs. SR-TEVAR) from 2014 to 2019. Facility charges were collected from the universal billing form UB-04 (form CMS 1450). RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included in each arm. There were no significant differences in the overall mean procedural charges between the two groups: TBE, $209,736 ($57,761) vs. SR-TEVAR $209,025 ($93,943), P = 0.94. TBE resulted in reduced operating room charges ($36,849 [$8750] vs. $48,073 [$10,825], P = 0.02) and reduced intensive care unit and telemetry room charges, which did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.23 and 0.12, respectively). Device/implant charges were the primary cost driver in both groups. Charges associated with TBE were significantly higher: $105,525 ($36,137) vs. $51,605 ($31,326), P > 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: TBE had similar overall procedural charges despite higher device/implant-related expenses and reduced facility resource utilization (lower operating room, intensive care unit, telemetry, and pharmacy charges). Taylor & Francis 2023-05-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10269387/ /pubmed/37334086 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2023.2212585 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
spellingShingle Original Research: Cardiology
Ramakrishnan, Ganesh
Beliveau, Lauren
Shinn, Kathryn
Gable, Cara
Brinkman, William
Shutze, William
Gable, Dennis
Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease
title Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease
title_full Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease
title_fullStr Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease
title_full_unstemmed Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease
title_short Real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease
title_sort real-world comparative claims analysis of a novel single-branched aortic stent graft device versus thoracic endograft placement with extra-anatomic debranching/revascularization in zone 2 aortic disease
topic Original Research: Cardiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10269387/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37334086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2023.2212585
work_keys_str_mv AT ramakrishnanganesh realworldcomparativeclaimsanalysisofanovelsinglebranchedaorticstentgraftdeviceversusthoracicendograftplacementwithextraanatomicdebranchingrevascularizationinzone2aorticdisease
AT beliveaulauren realworldcomparativeclaimsanalysisofanovelsinglebranchedaorticstentgraftdeviceversusthoracicendograftplacementwithextraanatomicdebranchingrevascularizationinzone2aorticdisease
AT shinnkathryn realworldcomparativeclaimsanalysisofanovelsinglebranchedaorticstentgraftdeviceversusthoracicendograftplacementwithextraanatomicdebranchingrevascularizationinzone2aorticdisease
AT gablecara realworldcomparativeclaimsanalysisofanovelsinglebranchedaorticstentgraftdeviceversusthoracicendograftplacementwithextraanatomicdebranchingrevascularizationinzone2aorticdisease
AT brinkmanwilliam realworldcomparativeclaimsanalysisofanovelsinglebranchedaorticstentgraftdeviceversusthoracicendograftplacementwithextraanatomicdebranchingrevascularizationinzone2aorticdisease
AT shutzewilliam realworldcomparativeclaimsanalysisofanovelsinglebranchedaorticstentgraftdeviceversusthoracicendograftplacementwithextraanatomicdebranchingrevascularizationinzone2aorticdisease
AT gabledennis realworldcomparativeclaimsanalysisofanovelsinglebranchedaorticstentgraftdeviceversusthoracicendograftplacementwithextraanatomicdebranchingrevascularizationinzone2aorticdisease