Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement at teaching versus nonteaching hospitals

Readmission Mortality After TAVR: The Combined Effect of Teaching Hospital Status and Cause of Readmission

Background

Variability in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) readmission rates highlights the importance of assessing post-discharge outcomes. Understanding how teaching hospital status and causes of readmission influence mortality could optimise post-TAVR care.

Methods

Using the National Readmissions Database, we identified 155,298 TAVR admissions from 2012 to 2020. We evaluated the interaction effect between teaching status and cause of readmission on readmission-related mortality through adjusted mixed-effects models.

Results

Overall, 18.9% of patients (n = 29,479) had a nonelective readmission within 90 days, with no significant difference between teaching and nonteaching hospitals (19.3% vs 18.9%; P > 0.05). Cardiac-related readmissions accounted for 42.7% of cases, while noncardiac readmissions made up 57.3%, with no differences observed in their distribution between teaching and nonteaching hospitals. The unadjusted 90-day readmission mortality rate was 3.8%, without significant differences between teaching and nonteaching hospitals (3.8% vs 4.1%; P = 0.38). A downward trend in nonelective readmission and readmission-related mortality rates was observed, regardless of teaching status. An interaction effect between teaching status and the cause of readmission was identified: Noncardiac readmissions to teaching hospitals were associated with increased odds of death (odds ratio [OR] 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.59-2.07; P < 0.001) compared with nonteaching hospitals, whereas cardiac readmissions to teaching hospitals were associated with decreased odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.48-0.62; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Our findings indicate a differential association between teaching hospital status and 90-day readmission mortality, contingent on the cause of readmission. Further research, including the use of metrics such as failure to rescue, is needed to better understand the relationship between patient-level variables and teaching hospital status.

Hospital Teaching Status and Outcomes in Type B Aortic Dissection: Analysis of More Than 40,000 Patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of hospital teaching status with outcomes of patients presenting with type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study of the National Readmissions Database (NRD), from 2016 to 2020.

SETTING

Hospitals across the United States stratified by teaching status.

PARTICIPANTS

TBAD patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical repair, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), and conservative medical management.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 44,981 TBAD patients were included, of whom 5421 (12%) were managed at a nonteaching (NT) hospital and 39,470 (88%) were treated at a teaching (T) hospital. Propensity score matching (1:1) yielded 4676 matched pairs. In-hospital mortality (12.9% for NT vs 12.5% for T; p = 0.58) and 30-day readmission (23.3% for NT vs 21.8% for T; p = 0.12) outcomes were not statistically significantly different between the groups. On multivariable regression, teaching status was not associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.943; 95% confidence interval [CI, 0.841-1.057; p = 0.31) or 30-day readmission (OR, 0.965; 95% CI, 0.88-1.058; p = 0.44). At teaching hospitals, TEVAR was associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.898; 95% CI, 1.596-2.257; p < .01), while hospital volume was associated with higher odds of 30-day readmission (quartile 3: OR, 1.488; 95% CI, 1.106-2.002; quartile 4: OR, 1.684; 95% CI, 1.256-2.257; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital teaching status alone was not associated with in-hospital mortality or 30-day readmission in TBAD patients. At teaching hospitals, management by TEVAR and greater hospital volume were associated with in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission outcome, respectively.

Readmission-related outcomes of surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients aged 65 or older with bicuspid aortic valve

BACKGROUND

There continues to be debate regarding the superiority of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV). We aimed to compare outcomes during readmissions in elderly patients with BAV who underwent SAVR or TAVR.

METHODS

Patients 65 years or older with BAV who underwent TAVR or isolated SAVR were identified using the National Readmission Database from 2012 through 2018. We compared outcomes during readmissions within 90 days after discharge from the index surgery. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust the baseline differences.

RESULTS

During the study period, 8555 and 1081 elderly patients with BAV underwent SAVR and TAVR, respectively. The number of patients who underwent TAVR went up by 179 % from 2012 to 2018. Propensity score matching yielded 573 patients in each group. A total of 111 (19.4 %) in the SAVR group and 125 (21.8 %) in the TAVR group were readmitted within 90 days after the index surgery (p = .31). The mortality during the readmissions within 90 days was equivalent between the two groups (0.9 % in the SAVR group vs. 3.2 % in the TAVR group, p = .22). However, the median hospital cost was approximately doubled in the TAVR group during the readmission (18,250 dollars vs. 9310 dollars in the SAVR group, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Readmission within 90 days was common in both groups. While the mortality during the readmissions after the surgery was equivalent between the two groups, hospital cost was significantly more expensive in the TAVR group.