Travis L. Engelbert

General and Vascular Surgery Readmissions: A Systematic Review

Hospital readmissions following surgical procedures are disruptive for patients and their families and correlates with poor outcomes including reoperation or death. Whereas readmissions following hospitalization for acute medical conditions have been the subject of ongoing research and policy initiatives for many years, readmissions have received less attention in the surgical specialties. This is remarkable given the frequency of surgery in this country, the overall cost of surgical care, and the perceived association between surgical readmission and quality of care.(1–3) Moreover, the health care costs associated with readmissions are substantial. Unplanned readmissions have an economic impact estimated at

Clinical characteristics associated with readmission among patients undergoing vascular surgery

17.4 billion per year.(1) Although debatable, a significant portion of hospital readmissions may be preventable.(2,4) Consequently, in 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed which contained legislation mandating a national readmissions reduction program.(5) Shortly thereafter, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) developed and implemented policies to penalize readmission.(6) Specifically, these penalties reduce reimbursement to hospitals with higher-than-expected readmission rates. These penalties have been already implemented for three medical diagnoses: congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, and pneumonia, and will be expanded to the surgical procedures including hip and knee arthroplasty beginning in 2015.(6) Comprehensive reviews have addressed global aspects of readmission or readmission of patients following medical hospitalization. However, there are no systematic reviews that address surgical readmissions. In a review of interventions aimed to reduce medical readmissions, Hansen et al concluded that no single intervention was consistently associated with a reduced risk, but did note that certain components (e.g. post discharge telephone call) were common to successful bundled interventions.(7) Kansagara et al performed a systematic review of risk prediction models for readmission and determined that current models perform poorly, concluding that efforts are needed to improve their performance, including measures of patient’s social support and detailed clinical data.(8) These analyses help underscore the need for research in surgical readmissions since: (1) there is no synthesis of the current literature describing surgical readmission, (2) medical readmissions are fundamentally different from surgical readmissions, and (3) there are no proven models for predicting or preventing surgical readmissions. In this review, recent studies of readmission within the surgical subspecialties of vascular, general, bariatric, and colorectal surgery are analyzed. Readmission rates and diagnoses as well as predictors of readmission are examined within these surgical fields to help create a foundation for future research that will ultimately improve the quality of surgical care.

Rehospitalization to Primary Versus Different Facilities Following Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE Readmission after a vascular surgery intervention is frequent, costly, and often considered preventable. Vascular surgery outcomes have recently been scrutinized by Medicare because of the high rates of readmission. We determined patient and clinical characteristics associated with readmission in a cohort of vascular surgery patients. METHODS From 2009 to 2013, the medical records of all patients (n = 2505) undergoing interventions by the vascular surgery service at a single tertiary care institution were retrospectively reviewed. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were examined for association with 30-day readmission to the same institution. RESULTS The 30-day readmission rate to the same institution was 9.7 % (n = 244). Procedures most likely to result in readmission were below-knee (25%), foot (22%), and toe amputations (19%), as well as lower extremity revascularization (22%). Patients covered by Medicaid (16.8%) and Medicare (10.0%) were most likely to be readmitted, followed by fee-for-service (9.5%), self-pay (8.0%), and health maintenance organizations (5.5%; P < .05). Patients urgently admitted were more likely to be readmitted (16.2%) than those electively admitted (9.1%; P < .01). Patient severity as rated using the All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups software (3M Health Information Systems, Wallingford, Conn) predicted readmission (16.2% high vs 6.2% low severity; P < .01). Initial length of stay was longer for readmitted than nonreadmitted patients (8.5 vs 6.1 days, respectively; P < .01). Intensive care unit admission during the initial hospitalization was associated with higher readmission rates in univariable analysis (18.3% with vs 9.5% without intensive care unit stay; P < .05). Discharge destination was also a strong predictor of readmission (rehabilitation, 19.2%; skilled nursing facility, 16.2%; home, 6.2%; P < .01). The effects of urgent admission, proximity to hospital, length of stay, lower extremity open procedure or amputation, and discharge destination persisted in multivariable logistic regression (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS To reduce readmission rates effectively, institutions must identify high-risk patients. Efforts should focus on subgroups undergoing selected interventions (amputations, lower extremity revascularization), those with urgent admissions, and patients with extended hospital stays. Patients in need of postacute care upon discharge are especially prone to readmission, requiring special attention to discharge planning and coordination of postdischarge care. By focusing on subgroups at risk for readmission, preventative resources can be efficiently targeted.

Complications of spinal fluid drainage in thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm surgery in 724 patients treated from 1987 to 2013.

OBJECTIVE Reducing readmissions represents a unique opportunity to improve care and reduce health care costs and is the focus of major payers. A large number of surgical patients are readmitted to hospitals other than where the primary surgery was performed, resulting in clinical decisions that do not incorporate the primary surgeon and potentially alter outcomes. This study characterizes readmission to primary vs different hospitals after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair and examines the implications with regard to mortality and cost. METHODS Patients who underwent open or endovascular aneurysm repair for AAA were identified from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Chronic Conditions Warehouse, a random 5% national sample of Medicare beneficiaries from 2005 to 2009. Outcomes for patients who underwent AAA repair and were readmitted within 30 days of initial discharge were compared based on readmission location (primary vs different hospital). RESULTS A total of 885 patients underwent AAA repair and were readmitted within 30 days. Of these, 626 (70.7%) returned to the primary facility, and 259 (29.3%) returned to a different facility. Greater distance from patient residence to the primary hospital was the strongest predictor of readmission to a different facility. Patients living 50 to 100 miles from the primary hospital were more likely to be readmitted to a different hospital compared with patients living <10 miles away (odds ratio, 8.50; P < .001). Patients with diagnoses directly related to the surgery (eg, wound infection) were more likely to be readmitted to the primary hospital, whereas medical diagnoses (eg, pneumonia and congestive heart failure) were more likely to be treated at a different hospital. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between patients readmitted to a different or the primary hospital. Median total 30-day payments were significantly lower at different vs primary hospitals (primary,

Postoperative renal failure in thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair with simple cross-clamp technique and 4°C renal perfusion

11,978 vs different,

A Novel Approach to Postoperative Wound Surveillance: Using Available Smartphone Technology to Improve Transitional Care

11,168; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS Readmission to a different facility after AAA repair is common and occurs more frequently than for the overall Medicare population. Patients travelling a greater distance for AAA repair are more likely to return to different vs the primary hospital when further care is required. For AAA repair, quality healthcare may be achieved at marginally lower cost and with greater patient convenience for selected readmissions at hospitals other than where the initial procedure was performed.

Patient and Clinical Characteristics Associated with Readmission Among Patients Undergoing Vascular Surgery

OBJECTIVE To study complications from spinal fluid drainage in open thoracic/thoracoabdominal and thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs to define risks of spinal fluid drainage. DESIGN Retrospective, prospectively maintained, institutionally approved database. SETTING Single institution university center. PARTICIPANTS 724 patients treated from 1987 to 2013 INTERVENTIONS: The authors drained spinal fluid to a pressure≤6 mmHg during thoracic aortic occlusion/reperfusion in open and ≤8 mmHg after stent deployment in endovascular procedures. Low pressure was maintained until leg strength was documented. If bloody fluid appeared, drainage was stopped. Head computed tomography (CT) and, if indicated, spine CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were performed for bloody spinal fluid or neurologic deficit. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Spinal fluid drainage was studied for bloody fluid, CT/MRI-identified intracranial and spinal bleeding, neurologic deficit, and death. Seventy-three patients (10.1%) had bloody fluid; 38 (5.2%) had intracranial blood on CT. One patient had spinal epidural hematoma. Higher volume of fluid drained and higher central venous pressure during proximal clamping were associated with intracranial blood. Most patients with intracranial blood were asymptomatic. Six patients had neurologic deficits: of the 6, 3 died (0.4%), 1 (0.1%) had permanent hemiparesis, and 2 recovered. Three of the six deficits were delayed, associated with heparin anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS 10% of patients had bloody spinal fluid; half of these had intracranial bleeding, which was almost always asymptomatic. In these patients, immediately stopping drainage and correcting coagulopathy may decrease the risk of serious complications. Neurologic deficit from spinal fluid drainage is uncommon (0.8%), but has high morbidity and mortality.

Postoperative Renal Failure in Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm (TAAA) Repair Using Simple Cross-Clamp Technique and 4-Degree Centigrade Renal Perfusion

OBJECTIVE Acute renal failure (ARF) is reported in up to 12% of patients after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair with assisted circulation. ARF increases mortality, reduces quality of life, and increases length of hospital stay. This study analyzes ARF after TAAA repair done without assisted circulation. METHODS A retrospective analysis of all patients treated for TAAA from 2000 to 2013 was performed using a concurrently maintained, institutionally approved database. All surgeries used simple cross-clamp technique, with moderate systemic hypothermia (32°-33°C) and renal artery perfusion with 4°C solution. Serum creatinine concentration was measured preoperatively and 1 day, 3 days, 7 days, and 30 days after surgery, and Cockcroft-Gault estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated. Kidney injury was classified by RIFLE (Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, End-stage renal disease) eGFR criteria. Changes in eGFR, kidney injury, ARF, dialysis, length of stay, mortality, and risk factors for ARF were analyzed with SAS-JMP software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) for univariate analysis and multivariate modeling. RESULTS From 2000 to 2013, 455 patients had TAAA surgery; 116 (25.5%) were acute. Mean preoperative eGFR was 62.3 mL/min. Mean renal ischemia time was 58.9 minutes. Eighteen patients (4%) had ARF; nine (2%) required temporary dialysis, and three (0.66%) required permanent dialysis. In univariate analysis, age, renal ischemia time, acuity, baseline eGFR, previous aortic surgery, surgical blood loss, and return to operating room for bleeding complications were significant for ARF (P < .05). Sex, aneurysm extent by Crawford type, cardiac index and mean arterial pressure after reperfusion, and use of loop diuretics were not significant for ARF. In a stepwise deletion model, acute (P = .0377), previous aortic surgery (P = .0167), return to operating room (P = .0213), and age (P = .0478) were significant for ARF. Surgical blood loss (P = .0056) and return to operating room (P = .0024) were significant for postoperative dialysis in multivariate analysis. Only surgical blood loss was significant for permanent dialysis in a multivariate model (P = .0331). CONCLUSIONS Very low ARF after TAAA repair can be achieved by simple cross-clamp technique with moderate systemic hypothermia and profound renal cooling. Age, preoperative eGFR, previous aortic surgery, return to operating room, and surgical blood loss were significant for ARF. Return to operating room for bleeding and surgical blood loss were significant for dialysis. Baseline eGFR <30 mL/min and postoperative dialysis were significant for mortality. Most patients with ARF, even those with temporary dialysis after TAAA repair, recover renal function to near preoperative levels.