The occurrence of adverse events in relation to time after registration for coronary artery bypass surgery: a population-based observational study

Heart surgery waiting list management in an ultra-peripheral region: impact of a risk-stratified queuing method

BACKGROUND

The management of heart surgery waiting list is essential, particularly in ultraperipheral regions. We aimed to characterise a cohort of patients awaiting surgery in such a region, and to assess the occurrence of adverse events and causative factors.

METHODS

A retrospective, multicentre analysis from 2016 to 2020. Patients were divided into "Urgent group" vs "Priority group" based on surgical priority. A composite outcome of death or hospital admission was determined.

RESULTS

We included 329 patients, 18.2% in the Urgent group. Baseline characteristics were similar, except for a higher prevalence of smoking habits in the Urgent group (56.7% vs 38.7%, p = 0.016), as well as the CCS class (p = 0.014) and EuroScore surgical risk (p < 0.001). Disease acuity indicated highest priority for coronary artery bypass grafting patients. Myocardial revascularization and aortic valvular replacement were the main procedures. Overall, 15.2% of patients received treatment within recommended waiting time, with 50.8% being Urgent patients. Urgent patients had higher risk for composite outcome (HR 3.92, 95% CI 1.26-12.22; p = 0.019), with fewer events reported (5% vs 17.8%, p = 0.051). Chronic kidney disease and previous open-heart surgery were independent predictors of this outcome. Chronic kidney disease remained as independent predictor at 1-year follow-up, while surgical priority did not affect outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite similar occurrences of adverse events on the waiting list, longer waiting times for patients in the Urgent group increase their risk of adverse events. The priority level had no impact on outcomes. Chronic kidney disease and open-heart surgery were independent predictors for events, highlighting their significance in the triage process.

Reducing surgical cancellations: a successful application of Lean Six Sigma in healthcare

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic emphasises the need to use healthcare resources efficient and effective to guarantee access to high-quality healthcare in an affordable manner. Surgical cancellations have a negative impact on these. We used the Lean Six Sigma (LSS) methodology to reduce cardiac surgical cancellations in a University Medical Center in the Netherlands, where approximately 20% of cardiac surgeries were being cancelled.

METHOD

A multifunctional project team used the data-driven LSS process improvement methodology and followed the 'DMAIC' improvement cycle (Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve, Control). Through all DMAIC phases, real-world data from the hospital information system supported the team during biweekly problem-solving sessions. This quality improvement study used an 'interrupted time series' study design. Data were collected between January 2014 and December 2016, covering 20 months prior and 16 months after implementation. Outcomes were number of last-minute coronary artery bypass graft cancellations, number of repeated diagnostics, referral to treatment time and patient satisfaction. Statistical process control charts visualised the change and impact over time. Students two-sample t-test was used to test statistical significance. A p<0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Last-minute cancellations were reduced by 50% (p=0.010), repeated preoperative diagnostics (X-ray) declined by 67% (p=0.021), referral to treatment time reduced by 35% (p=0.000) and patient Net Promoter Score increased by 14% (p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that LSS is an effective quality improvement approach to help healthcare organisations to deliver more safe, timely, effective, efficient, equitable and patient-centred care. Crucial success factors were the use of a structured data-driven problem-solving approach, focus on patient value and process flow, leadership support and engagement of involved healthcare professionals through the entire care pathway. Ongoing monitoring of key performance indicators is helpful in engaging the organisation to maintain continuous process improvement and sustaining long-term impact.

Mortality and morbidity of patients on the waiting list for coronary artery bypass graft surgery

OBJECTIVES

The public health care system in Brazil has extensive waiting lists of patients requiring complex operations such as coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The purpose of this study was to identify the mortality and morbidity rates of the patients awaiting CABG and identify predictors of adverse events and their association with perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of outpatient medical records of patients referred for this elective procedure in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Excluded from the study were records of patients with any of the following: an indication for urgent surgery, unstable angina or concomitant surgical valvular disease or subsequent transfer to clinical or percutaneous therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 274 patients were identified and met the inclusion criteria, with a median waiting time for an operation of 142.7 days. While waiting for CABG surgery, 31 (11.3%) patients died of any cause and 42 (15.3%) patients had a serious cardiac event (death, myocardial infarction or unstable angina). Of the 22 (8%) incidents of acute myocardial infarction, 8 (2.9%) were non-fatal and 14 (5.1%) were fatal. There was a greater risk of death awaiting CABG surgery in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction below 45% (hazard ratio = 2.33, 95% confidence interval 1.02-5.32; P = 0.039). The operative mortality rate was 5.8%. Although there was no evidence of worse perioperative outcomes in patients with prolonged waiting times for an operation, there was an association between waiting more than 16 weeks for an operation and death while on the list.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive waiting periods for CABG contribute to higher mortality and morbidity rates, especially in patients with left ventricular dysfunction.

Portuguese Society of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery/Portuguese Society of Cardiology recommendations for waiting times for cardiac surgery

Appointed jointly by the Portuguese Society of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery (SPCCTV) and the Portuguese Society of Cardiology (SPC), the Working Group on Waiting Times for Cardiac Surgery was established with the aim of developing practical recommendations for clinically acceptable waiting times for the three critical phases of the care of adults with heart disease who require surgery or other cardiological intervention: cardiology appointments; the diagnostic process; and invasive treatment. Cardiac surgery has specific characteristics that are not comparable to other surgical specialties. It is important to reduce maximum waiting times and to increase the efficacy of systems for patient monitoring and tracking. The information in this document is mainly based on available clinical information. The methodology used to establish the criteria was based on studies on the natural history of heart disease, clinical studies comparing medical treatment with intervention, retrospective and prospective analyses of patients on waiting lists, and the opinions of experts and working groups. Following the first step, represented by publication of this document, the SPCCTV and SPC, as the bodies best suited to oversee this process, are committed to working together to define operational strategies that will reconcile the clinical evidence with the actual situation and with available resources.

[ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization : Amendments 2014]

One of the most important treatment principles in interventional cardiology relies on myocardial revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or surgical placement of coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG). However, in order to apply these principles effectively, it is important to identify patients who require revascularization. Consequently, the appropriate method has to be selected to effectively restore blood flow. Patients will only benefit from the interventional or surgical procedures when those revascularization measures that can cause more harm than good are avoided. In the new European Society of Cardiology and European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS) guidelines on myocardial revascularization some new aspects will be addressed.