Drivers of healthcare costs associated with the episode of care for surgical aortic valve replacement versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Performance of administrative database frailty instruments in predicting clinical outcomes and cost for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a historical cohort study

PURPOSE

Frailty instruments may improve prognostic estimates for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Few studies have evaluated and compared the performance of administrative database frailty instruments for patients undergoing TAVI. This study aimed to examine the performance of administrative database frailty instruments in predicting clinical outcomes and costs in patients who underwent TAVI.

METHODS

We conducted a historical cohort study of 3,848 patients aged 66 yr or older who underwent a TAVI procedure in Ontario, Canada from 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2018. We used the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Group (ACG) frailty indicator and the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) to assign frailty status. Outcomes of interest were in-hospital mortality, one-year mortality, rehospitalization, and healthcare costs. We compared the performance of the two frailty instruments with that of a reference model that adjusted baseline covariates and procedural characteristics. Accuracy measures included c-statistics, Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), net reclassification index (NRI), bias, and accuracy of cost estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 863 patients (22.4%) were identified as frail using the Johns Hopkins ACG frailty indicator and 865 (22.5%) were identified as frail using the HFRS. Although agreement between the frailty instruments was fair (Kappa statistic = 0.322), each instrument classified different subgroups as frail. Both the Johns Hopkins ACG frailty indicator (rate ratio [RR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06 to 1.20) and the HFRS (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.21) were significantly associated with increased one-year costs. Compared with the reference model, both the Johns Hopkins ACG frailty indicator and HFRS significantly improved NRI for one-year mortality (Johns Hopkins ACG frailty indicator: NRI, 0.160; P < 0.001; HFRS: NRI, 0.146; P = 0.001) and rehospitalization (Johns Hopkins ACG frailty indicator: NRI, 0.201; P < 0.001; HFRS: NRI, 0.141; P = 0.001). These improvements in NRI largely resulted from classification improvement among those who did not experience the event. With one-year mortality, there was a significant improvement in IDI (IDI, 0.003; P < 0.001) with the Johns Hopkins ACG frailty indicator. This improvement in performance resulted from an increase in the mean probability of the event among those with the event.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative frailty assessment may add some predictive value for TAVI outcomes. Use of administrative database frailty instruments may provide small but significant improvements in case-mix adjustment when profiling hospitals for certain outcomes.

Early versus late discharge after transcatheter aortic valve replacement and readmissions for permanent pacemaker implantation

OBJECTIVE

To examine the rate of readmission for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation with early versus late discharge after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

There is a current trend toward early discharge after TAVR. However, paucity of data exists on the impact of such practice on readmissions for PPM implantation.

METHODS

The Nationwide Readmission Database 2016-2018 was queried for all hospitalizations where patients underwent TAVR. Hospitalizations were stratified into early (Days 0 and 1) versus late (≥Day 2) discharge groups. Observations in which PPM was required in the index admission were excluded. Multivariable regression analyses involving patient- and hospital-related variables were utilized. The primary outcome was 90-day readmission for PPM implantation.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 68,482 TAVR hospitalizations, 20,261 (29.6%) with early versus 48,221 (70.4%) with late discharge. Early discharge after TAVR increased over the study period (16.2% in 2016 vs. 37.9% in 2018, P_trend  < 0.01). Nevertheless, 90-day readmission for PPM implantation remained stable (1.8% in 2016 vs. 2.0% in 2018, P_trend  = 0.32). The 90-day readmission rate for PPM implantation (2.0% vs. 1.8%; adjusted odds ratio: 1.15; 95% confidence interval: 0.95-1.39; p = 0.15) and median time-to-readmission (5 days [interquartile range, IQR 3-9] vs. 5 days [IQR 3-14], p = 0.92) were similar with early versus late discharge. Similar rates were observed regardless of whether readmission was elective versus not. Early discharge was associated with lower hospitalization cost ($39,990 ± $13,681 vs. $46,750 ± $18,218, p < 0.01) compared with late discharge.

CONCLUSION

In patients who did not require PPM during the index TAVR hospitalization, the rate of readmission for PPM implantation was similar with early versus late discharge.

Financial Incentives for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Ontario, Canada: A Cost-Utility Analysis

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis, which has become standard of care. The objective of this study was to determine the maximum cost‐effective investment in TAVI care that should be made at a health system level to meet quality indicator goals.

Methods and Results

We performed a cost‐utility analysis using probabilistic patient‐level simulation of TAVI care from the Ontario, Canada, Ministry of Health perspective. Costs and health utilities were accrued over a 2‐year time horizon. We created 4 hypothetical strategies that represented TAVI care meeting ≥1 quality indicator targets, (1) reduced wait times, (2) reduced hospital length of stay, (3) reduced pacemaker use, and (4) combined strategy, and compared these with current TAVI care. Per‐person costs, quality‐adjusted life years, and clinical outcomes were estimated by the model. Using these, incremental net monetary benefits were calculated for each strategy at different cost‐effectiveness thresholds between $0 and $100 000 per quality‐adjusted life year. Clinical improvements over the current practice were estimated with all comparator strategies. In Ontario, achieving quality indicator benchmarks could avoid ≈26 wait‐list deaths and 200 wait‐list hospitalizations annually. Compared with current TAVI care, the incremental net monetary benefit for this strategy varied from $10 765 (±$8721) and $17 221 (±$8977). This would translate to an annual investment of between ≈$14 to ≈$22 million by the Ontario Ministry of Health to incentivize these performance measures being cost‐effective.

Conclusions

This study has quantified the modest annual investment required and substantial clinical benefit of meeting improvement goals in TAVI care.

One-Year Costs Associated with Hospitalizations Due to Aortic Stenosis in Canada

Background

There is a lack of data on the burden of patients hospitalized with aortic stenosis (AS) in Canada. The primary study objective was to document the index and 1-year costs of hospitalized patients with AS in Canada. Secondary objectives were to explore results by treatment modality and Canadian provinces.

Methods

Hospitalized patients with a most responsible diagnosis (MRD) of AS during fiscal year 2014/2015 were identified using Canadian administrative databases. Costs were calculated for the index admission and for up to 1 year. For our secondary analyses, patients were classified according to the intervention received: surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), SAVR with coronary artery bypass graft, or transfemoral or transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Hospitalized AS patients who did not undergo SAVR or transcatheter aortic valve implantation were classified as the untreated group. The data were also analyzed by Canadian provinces.

Results

During fiscal year 2014/15, a total of 7217 Canadians were hospitalized with an MRD of AS. The mean (standard deviation) age of our population was 74.2 (11.5) years, and 39% were female. The 1-year hospital costs associated with an MRD of AS in Canada were calculated at $393 million. Our secondary analyses suggest that patient demographics (mean age ranging from 69 to 82 years) and outcomes (median length of stay ranging from 6 to 12 days) differ among treatment modalities and Canadian provinces.

Conclusions

AS hospitalizations result in a significant cost burden in Canada. Future research is needed to better understand variation among treatment modalities and Canadian provinces.

Predictors of cumulative cost for patients with severe aortic stenosis referred for surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada

AIMS 

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has transformed severe aortic stenosis (AS) management. Our aim was understand AS cost drivers from referral to 1-year post-procedure.

METHODS AND RESULTS 

We identified patients referred for either TAVR/SAVR between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2018, with follow-up until 31 March 2019 in Ontario, Canada. We stratified costs into (i) a referral phase, (ii) a procedural phase from the procedure date to 60 days post-procedure, and (iii) post-procedure phase from 61 days to 1 year. Multivariable regression modelling using generalized linear models with a log link gamma distribution was used to identify cost drivers in each phase. The study cohort included 12 086 AS patients; 4832 were referred for TAVR and 7254 were referred for SAVR. The median cost for TAVR was higher than SAVR in the referral ($3593 vs. $2944) and post-procedural ($5938 vs. $3257) phases. In contrast, for the procedural phase, SAVR had a median cost of $29 756 vs. $27 907 for TAVR. Predictors of high cost in the referral phase were longer wait-time, and an urgent in-hospital procedure. In the procedural phase, procedural complications were the major drivers of higher cost. In the post-procedural phase, patient co-morbidities were the major drivers, specifically dialysis, liver disease, cancer, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION 

We identified distinct patterns of cost accumulation and modifiable drivers for SAVR compared with TAVR; these drivers may guide clinical and health policy decisions to make AS care more efficient.

Evolution of outcome and complications in TAVR: a meta-analysis of observational and randomized studies

Aim of the present analysis was to collect and pool all available data currently in the literature regarding outcomes and complications of all approved TAVR prosthesis and to assess the transition from first to next generation TAVR devices by directly comparing both in regard of procedure related complications. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is a well established treatment modality in patients with severe aortic stenosis deemed to be inoperable or at unacceptable risk for open heart surgery. First generation prostheses were associated with a high rate of peri-procedural complications like paravalvular regurgitation, valve malpositioning, vascular complications and conduction disorders. Refinement of the available devices incorporate features to address the limitations of the first-generation devices. A PRISMA checklist-guided systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies, national and device specific registries or randomized clinical trials was conducted. Studies were identified by searching PUBMED, SCOPUS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and LILACs from January 2000 to October 2017. We extracted and pooled data on both mortality and complications from 273 studies for twelve different valves prostheses in a total of 68,193 patients. In second generation prostheses as compared to first generation devices, we observed a significant decrease in mortality (1.47 ± 1.73% vs. 5.41 ± 4.35%; p < 0.001), paravalvular regurgitation (1.75 ± 2.43vs. 12.39 ± 9.38, p < 0.001) and MACE. TAVR with contemporary next generation devices has led to an impressive improvement in TAVR safety driven by refined case selection, improved procedural techniques and increased site experience.

Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis

We determined the incidence, clinical characteristics, and risk factors of post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)-associated infective endocarditis (IE). We compared the incidence of IE after TAVR versus after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The incidence rate of IE 1-year post-TAVR was 0.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8-1.0). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with significantly reduced IE incidence (incidence rate ratio: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.92, P = .011) compared with SAVR. In patients with TAVR IE, the pooled in-hospital mortality was 37.8% (95% CI: 32.4-43.3, I ² = 54.9%). Pooled adjusted hazard ratio (HR) revealed that peri-procedural peripheral artery disease (HR: 4.02, 95% CI: 2.28-7.10, P < .0001), moderate or severe residual aortic regurgitation (HR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.53-3.59, P < .0001), orotracheal intubation (HR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.19-3.82, P = .011), and male gender (HR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.47-1.97, P < .0001) were risk factors for post-TAVR IE. Post-TAVR IE is a life-threatening complication often resulting in in-hospital mortality. The current evidence-based meta-analysis to identify risk factors may lead to the development of effective preventive and therapeutic strategies for post-TAVR IE to ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Healthcare costs and resource utilization associated with treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

BACKGROUND

The management of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients requires the coordination of prehospital, in-hospital and post-discharge teams. Data reporting a comprehensive analysis of all costs associated with treating OHCA are scarce. We aimed to describe the total costs (and their components) related to the management of OHCA patients.

PATIENT AND METHODS

We performed an analysis on a merged database of the Toronto Regional RescuNet Epistry database (prehospital data) and administrative population-based databases in Ontario. All non-traumatic OHCA patients over 18 years of age treated by the EMS between January 1, 2006, and March 31, 2014, were included in this study. The primary outcome was per patient longitudinal cumulative healthcare costs, from time of collapse to a maximum follow-up until death or 30 days after the event. We included all available cost sectors, from the perspective of the health system payer. We used multivariable generalized linear models with a logarithmic link and a gamma distribution to determine predictors of healthcare costs.

RESULTS

25,826/44,637 patients were treated by EMS services for an OHCA (mostly male 64.4%, mean age 70.1). 11,727 (45%) were pronounced dead on scene, 8359 (32%) died in the emergency department, 3640 (14%) were admitted to hospital but died before day-30, and 2100 (8.1%) were still alive at day-30. Total cost was $690 [interquartile range (IQR) $308, $1742] per patient; ranging from $290 [IQR $188, $390] for patients who were pronounced on scene to $39,216 [IQR 21,802, 62,093] for patients who were still alive at day-30. In-hospital costs accounted for 93% of total costs. After adjustment for age and gender, rate of patient survival was the main driver of total costs: the rate ratio was 3.88 (95% confidence interval 3.80, 3.95), 49.46 and 148.89 for patients who died in the ED, patients who died after the ED but within 30 days, and patients who were still alive at day-30 compared to patients who were pronounced dead on scene, respectively. Factors independently associated with costs were the number of prehospital teams (rate ratio (RR) 5.50 [5.32, 5.67] for being treated by 4 teams vs. 1), the need for hospital transfer (RR 2.38 [2.01, 2.82]), coronary angiography (RR 1.43 [1.27, 1.62]) and targeted temperature management (RR 1.25 [1.09, 1.44]).

CONCLUSION

Survival is the main driver of total costs of treating OHCA patients in a large Canadian health system. Inpatient costs accounted for the majority of the total costs; potentially modifiable factors include the number of prehospital teams that arrive to the scene of the arrest and the need for between-hospital transfers after successful resuscitation.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Severe, Symptomatic Aortic Valve Stenosis at Intermediate Surgical Risk: A Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is the conventional treatment in patients at low or intermediate surgical risk. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a less invasive procedure, originally developed as an alternative for patients at high or prohibitive surgical risk.

METHODS

We conducted a health technology assessment of TAVI versus SAVR in patients with severe, symptomatic aortic valve stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, which included an evaluation of effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, budget impact, and patient preferences and values. We performed a literature search to retrieve systematic reviews and selected one that was relevant to our research question. We complemented the systematic review with a literature search to identify randomized controlled trials published after the review. Applicable, previously published cost-effectiveness analyses were available, so we did not conduct a primary economic evaluation. We analyzed the net budget impact of publicly funding TAVI in people at intermediate surgical risk in Ontario. To contextualize the potential value of TAVI for people at intermediate surgical risk, we spoke with people who had aortic valve stenosis and their families.

RESULTS

We identified two randomized controlled trials; they found that in patients with severe, symptomatic aortic valve stenosis, TAVI was noninferior to SAVR with respect to the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke within 2 years of follow-up (GRADE: High). However, compared with SAVR, TAVI had a higher risk of some complications and a lower risk of others. Device-related costs for TAVI (approximately $23,000) are much higher than for SAVR (approximately $6,000). Based on two published cost-effectiveness analyses conducted from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health, TAVI was more expensive and, on average, more effective (i.e., it produced more quality-adjusted life-years) than SAVR. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios showed that TAVI may be cost-effective, but the probability of TAVI being cost-effective versus SAVR was less than 60% at a willingness-to-pay value of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. The net budget impact of publicly funding TAVI in Ontario would be about $2 million to $3 million each year for the next 5 years. This cost may be reduced if people receiving TAVI have a shorter hospital stay (≤ 3 days). We interviewed 13 people who had lived experience with aortic valve stenosis. People who had undergone TAVI reported reduced physical and psychological effects and a shorter recovery time. Patients and caregivers living in remote or northern regions reported lower out-of-pocket costs with TAVI because the length of hospital stay was reduced. People said that TAVI increased their quality of life in the short-term immediately after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

In people with severe, symptomatic aortic valve stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, TAVI was similar to SAVR with respect to the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke. However, the two treatments had different patterns of complications. The study authors also noted that longer follow-up is needed to assess the durability of the TAVI valve. Compared with SAVR, TAVI may provide good value for money, but publicly funding TAVI in Ontario would result in additional costs over the next 5 years. People with aortic valve stenosis who had undergone TAVI appreciated its less invasive nature and reported a substantial reduction in physical and psychological effects after the procedure, improving their quality of life.

Effect of procedural refinement of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation on outcomes and costs: a single-centre retrospective study

Objectives

To determine the effect of introducing several procedural refinements of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on clinical outcomes and costs.

Design

Retrospective analysis comparing two consecutive 1-year periods, before and after the introduction of procedural refinements.

Setting

Tertiary hospital aortic valve programme.

Participants

Consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI treated between April 2014 and August 2015 using the initial setup (n=70; control group) or between September 2015 and August 2016 after the introduction of procedural refinements (n=89).

Interventions

Introduction of conscious sedation, percutaneous access and closure, omission of transoesophageal echocardiography during the procedure, and an early discharge procedure.

Outcome measures

Procedural characteristics, complications and outcomes; length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital; hospital-related direct costs associated with TAVI.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of complications or mortality between the two groups. The mean length of stay in the ICU was significantly shorter in the procedural-refinement group compared with the control group (5.1 vs 57.2 hours, p<0.001), as was the mean length of hospital stay (4.7 vs 6.6 days, p<0.001). The total cost per TAVI procedure was significantly lower, by £3580, in the procedural-refinement group (p<0.001). This was largely driven by lower ICU costs.

Conclusions

Among patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI, procedural refinement facilitated a shorter stay in ICU and earlier discharge from hospital and was cost saving compared with the previous setup.

Trends in the incidence and outcomes of patients with aortic stenosis hospitalization

BACKGROUND

Although the burden of aortic stenosis (AS) on our health care system is expected to rise, little is known regarding its epidemiology at the population level. Our primary objective was to evaluate trends in AS hospitalization, treatment and outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a population-based observational study including 37,970 patients newly hospitalized with AS from 2004 and 2013 in Ontario, Canada. We calculated age- and sex-standardized rate of AS hospitalization through direct standardization. The independent association between year of the hospitalization, and 30-day and 1-year mortality rate was evaluated using logistic regression models to account for temporal changes in patient characteristics.

RESULTS

The overall age- and sex-standardized AS hospitalization rate increased slightly from 36 per 100,000 in 2004 to 39 per 100,000 in 2013. A substantial increase was seen in patients ≥85years, where hospitalization rates increased 29% from 400 to 516 per 100,000 from 2004 to 2013 (P<.001). In this study period, 36.2% of patients received aortic valve interventions within 30days of hospitalization. Among treated patients, an improving mortality trend was observed in which the adjusted odds ratio (OR) was significantly lower in 2013 as compared to 2004 (OR 0.55 for 30-day mortality, 0.74 for 1-year morality). In contrast, no significant temporal change in mortality was seen among patients without aortic valve intervention.

CONCLUSION

AS hospitalizations in the elderly increased significantly beyond that was expected from population growth. Many AS patients did not receive aortic valve intervention after hospitalization. Mortality among the treated patients improved significantly over time.

Feasibility and safety of early discharge after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation - rationale and design of the FAST-TAVI registry

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing trend towards shorter hospital stays after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), in particular for patients undergoing the procedure via transfemoral (TF) access. Preliminary data suggest that there exists a population of patients that can be discharged safely very early after TF-TAVI. However, current evidence is limited to few retrospective studies, encompassing relatively small sample sizes.

METHODS

The Feasibility And Safety of early discharge after Transfemoral TAVI (FAST-TAVI) registry is a prospective observational registry that will be conducted at 10 sites across Italy, the Netherlands and the UK. Patients will be included if they have been scheduled to undergo TF-TAVI with the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve (THV; Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA). The primary endpoint is a composite of all-cause mortality, vascular-access-related complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, re-hospitalisation due to cardiac reasons, kidney failure and major bleeding, occurring during the first 30 days after hospital discharge. Patients will be stratified according to whether they were high or low risk for early discharge (≤3 days) (following pre-specified criteria), and according to whether or not they were discharged early. Secondary endpoints will include time-to-event (Kaplan-Meier) analysis for the primary outcome and its individual components, analysis of the relative costs of early and late discharge, and changes in short- and long-term quality of life. Multivariate logistic regression will be used to identify factors that indicate that a patient may be suitable for early discharge.

DISCUSSION

The data gathered in the FAST-TAVI registry should help to clarify the safety of early discharge after TF-TAVI and to identify patient and procedural characteristics that make early discharge from hospital a safe and cost-effective strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02404467 (registration first received March 23rd 2015).

Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis in Low-Intermediate Risk Patients: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as the treatment of choice for patients with severe aortic stenosis at high surgical risk; the role of TAVR compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the low-intermediate surgical risk population remains uncertain. Our primary objective was to determine differences in 30-day and late mortality in patients treated with TAVR compared with SAVR at low-intermediate risk (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality < 10%).

METHODS

Medline and Embase were searched from 2010 to March 2017 for studies that compared TAVR with SAVR in the low-intermediate surgical risk population, restricted to randomized clinical trials and matched observational studies. Two investigators independently abstracted the data and a random effects meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Four randomized clinical trials (n = 4042) and 9 propensity score-matched observational studies (n = 4192) were included in the meta-analysis (n = 8234). There was no difference in 30-day mortality between TAVR and SAVR (3.2% vs 3.1%, pooled risk ratio: 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.30; P = 0.89; I² = 0%) or mortality at a median of 1.5-year follow-up (incident rate ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.15; P = 0.83; I² = 0%). There was a higher risk of pacemaker implantation and greater than trace aortic insufficiency in the TAVR group whereas the risk of early stroke, atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, cardiogenic shock, and major bleeding was higher in the SAVR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was no difference in 30-day and late mortality, the rate of complications differed between TAVR and SAVR in the low-intermediate surgical risk population.

Short Length of Stay After Elective Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement is Not Associated With Increased Early or Late Readmission Risk

BACKGROUND

Elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are at risk of hospital readmission postprocedure. It is not known whether the index hospital length of stay and, specifically, early discharge post-TAVR is associated with an increased risk of readmission. We hypothesized a nonlinear relationship whereby both short and long lengths of stay were associated with increased readmission risk.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort analysis of patients undergoing elective transfemoral TAVR and surviving to discharge between January 2007 and March 2014. The exposure variable was hospital length of stay measured from the procedure date to the date of discharge and modeled as a continuous variable in a multivariable cause-specific Cox regression. Main outcome measures were 30-day and 1-year all-cause readmissions. The study population consisted of 709 patients with a median length of stay of 6 days (interquartile range, 4-8). At 30-days and 1-year, 13.5% and 44.0% of patients were readmitted, respectively. Although post-TAVR length of stay was not associated with 30-day all-cause readmissions (P=0.925), there existed a significant association with 1-year readmission (P=0.010) after adjustment for baseline clinical variables. The association between post-TAVR length of stay and 1-year readmission was linear (P=0.549 for nonlinearity) with no evidence supporting an increased readmission risk for shorter length of stays.

CONCLUSIONS

Among elderly survivors of elective transfemoral TAVR, a short postprocedural length of stay was not associated with an increased risk readmission within 30 days or 1 year. However, the risk of 1-year readmission increased with longer post-TAVR lengths of stay.