scholarly journals Hospital readmissions after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation among patients with heart failure in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Lima ◽  
K Kennedy ◽  
A Parulkar ◽  
W Sheikh ◽  
E Sharma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Hospital Readmissions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
Heart Failure Exacerbation

Abstract Background Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation may improve quality of life and long-term mortality among patients with heart failure. Purpose The rates of hospital readmission after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation among patients with an established diagnosis of heart failure are largely unknown. We aimed to assess the rates and causes of 30-day readmission among patients with heart failure undergoing catheter ablation vs. medical therapy for atrial fibrillation in the United States. Methods The 2016 Nationwide Readmissions Database was screened for patients with diagnosis of heart failure and atrial fibrillation using the 10th Revision of International Classification of Diseases codes. Patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation were grouped separately from those treated medically for atrial fibrillation. Thirty-day readmissions were assessed for both groups. Results The analytical cohort included 749,776 (national estimate of 1,421,673) patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation. This included 2,204 patients that underwent catheter ablation. Patients treated with catheter ablation had lower 30-day readmissions compared to the medical therapy group (16.8% vs 20.1%, p<0.001). Fifty-five percent of all readmissions among the catheter ablation cohort were related to cardiac events. Heart failure exacerbation (40%) and arrhythmia (36%) were the most common cardiac causes for readmission after catheter ablation (Figure). Conclusions In a contemporary nationwide analysis of patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation, compared to medical therapy those treated with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation had fewer 30-day readmissions after index hospital discharge. The most common cause for readmission among patients treated with catheter ablation was heart failure exacerbation and arrhythmia. Causes of readmission Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals FINANCIAL HARDSHIP FROM MEDICAL BILLS AMONG PATIENTS WITH HEART FAILURE IN THE UNITED STATES

2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (18) ◽  
pp. 785
Author(s):  
Hyeon-Ju Ali ◽  
Javier Valero Elizondo ◽  
Stephen Yishu Wang ◽  
Arvind Bhimaraj ◽  
Safi Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
The United States ◽  
Financial Hardship ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
Medical Bills

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
O.M Aldaas ◽  
F Lupercio ◽  
C.L Malladi ◽  
P.S Mylavarapu ◽  
D Darden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
One Year

Abstract Background Catheter ablation improves clinical outcomes in symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the role of catheter ablation in HF patients with a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is less clear. Purpose To determine the efficacy of catheter ablation of AF in patients with HFpEF relative to those with HFrEF. Methods We performed an extensive literature search and systematic review of studies that compared AF recurrence at one year after catheter ablation of AF in patients with HFpEF versus those with HFrEF. Risk ratio (RR) 95% confidence intervals were measured using the Mantel-Haenszel method for dichotomous variables, where a RR<1.0 favors the HFpEF group. Results Four studies with a total of 563 patients were included, of which 312 had HFpEF and 251 had HFrEF. All patients included were undergoing first time catheter ablation of AF. Patients with HFpEF experienced similar recurrence of AF one year after ablation on or off antiarrhythmic drugs compared to those with HFrEF (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.69–1.10, p=0.24), as shown in Figure 1. Recurrence of AF was assessed with electrocardiography, Holter monitoring, and/or event monitoring at scheduled follow-up visits and final follow-up. Conclusion Based on the results of this meta-analysis, catheter ablation of AF in patients with HFpEF appears as efficacious in maintaining sinus rhythm as in those with HFrEF. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of catheter ablation versus medical therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation in the United Kingdom

EP Europace ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Leung ◽  
RJ Imhoff ◽  
D Frame ◽  
PJ Mallow ◽  
L Goldstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Uk National Health Service ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Af Recurrence

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): This research study was funded by Biosense Webster, Inc. Dr Leung has received research support from Attune Medical (Chicago, IL) towards a research fellowship at St. George"s University of London. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. Background Randomised data on patient-related outcomes comparing catheter ablation to medical therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) have shown the effectiveness of catheter ablation. Ablation versus medical therapy should also be analysed from a health economics perspective to achieve optimal healthcare resource allocation. Purpose To determine the cost effectiveness of catheter ablation compared to medical therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Methods A patient-level Markov health-state transition model was used to conduct a cost utility analysis comparing catheter ablation and medical therapy for the treatment of AF. A systematic review and meta-analysis of catheter ablation treatment versus medical therapy (rhythm and/or rate control drugs) was conducted to enable comparison of AF recurrence between treatment groups utilising the model. Additional model parameters were established based upon a best-evidence review of the literature. The model simulated care delivered from a secondary care perspective. Total patients simulated in this model over a lifetime were 250,000, with patients entering the model at age 64. Only previously treated AF patients were included, including those with concomitant heart failure. A separate scenario analysis was conducted to determine the cost effectiveness specifically in the cohort of patients with AF and heart failure. Main outcomes measures Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and average total expected costs and quality-of-life years (QALYs) incurred over the lifetime of a patient. AF recurrence, complications and cardiovascular adverse events were compared over the total duration inside the model. Results In the base case analysis, catheter ablation resulted in a favourable ICER of £8,614 per additional QALY gained when compared to medical therapy, well below the national Willingness-to-Pay threshold of £20,000. Catheter ablation was associated with an expected increase of 1.01 QALYs, while adding an additional cost £8,742 over a patient’s lifetime. The cost-effectiveness of catheter ablation was improved in the heart failure sub-group analysis, with an ICER of £6,438. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the medical therapy group failed rhythm control at any stage compared to catheter ablation (72% vs 24%) and at a faster rate (median time to treatment failure: 3.8 vs 10 years). Conclusion Catheter ablation appears to be a highly cost-effective treatment for atrial fibrillation, compared to medical therapy, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. With low rates of adverse events and superiority in achieving rhythm control, AF ablation services should be prioritised with appropriate allocation of healthcare resources.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document