A cohort cost analysis of lumbar laminectomy—current trends in surgeon and hospital fees distribution

Background contextSpine-related health-care expenditures accounted for $86 billion dollars in 2005, a 65% increase from 1997. However, when adjusting for inflation, surgeons have seen decreased reimbursement rates over the last decade.PurposeTo assess contribution of surgeon fees to overall procedure cost, we reviewed the charges and reimbursements for a noninstrumented lumbar laminectomy and compared the amounts reimbursed to the hospital and to the surgeon at a major academic institution.Study design/settingRetrospective review of costs associated with lumbar laminectomies.Patient sampleSeventy-seven patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy for spinal stenosis throughout an 18-month period at a single academic medical center were included in this study.Outcome measuresCost and number of laminectomy levels.MethodsThe reimbursement schedule of six academic spine surgeons was collected over 18 months for performed noninstrumented lumbar laminectomy procedures. Bills and collections by the hospital and surgeon professional fees were comparatively analyzed and substratified by number of laminectomy levels and patient insurance status. Unpaired two-sample Student t test was used for analysis of significant differences.ResultsDuring an 18-month period, patients underwent a lumbar laminectomy involving on average three levels and stayed in the hospital on average 3.5 days. Complications were uncommon (13%). Average professional fee billing for the surgeon was $6,889±$2,882, and collection was $1,848±$1,433 (28% overall, 30% for private insurance, and 23% for Medicare/Medicaid insurance). Average hospital billing for the inpatient hospital stay minus professional fees from the surgeon was $14,766±$7,729, and average collection on such bills was $13,391±$7,256 (92% overall, 91% for private insurance, and 85% for Medicare/Medicaid insurance).ConclusionBased on this analysis, the proportion of overall costs allocated to professional fees for a noninstrumented lumbar laminectomy is small, whereas those allocated to hospital costs are far greater. These findings suggest that the current focus on decreasing physician reimbursement as the principal cost saving strategy will lead to minimal reimbursement for surgeons without a substantial drop in the overall cost of procedures performed.     

Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis

Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis provides the surgeon with an alternative to?traditional open techniques. Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis has demonstrated faster union rates, decreased complications, reduced postoperative pain, and shorter hospital stays. Adherence to sound surgical techniques, particularly with regard to joint preparation, is critical for success. Although total ankle replacement continues to grow in popularity, arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis remains a viable alternative for the management of end-stage arthritic ankle.     

微创踝关节融合术治疗足踝创伤性关节炎的疗效观察

目的：观察关节镜下微创踝关节融合术治疗足踝创伤性关节炎的疗效。方法回顾性分析2009年1月至2012年12月在我院接受微创及开放式踝关节融合术的26例创伤性踝关节炎病人的临床资料,按治疗方法不同分为微创组（10例）和开放组（16例）,对比两组病人术后6个月及1年的骨性融合率和美国足踝外科医师协会（AOFAS）踝与后足功能评分。结果术后6个月时,微创组的骨性融合率为80.0%（8/10）,高于开放组的31.3%（5/16）,差异有统计学意义（χ2=5.850,P=0.016）;术后1年时两组病人全部达到骨性融合。术后6个月,两组病人的AOFAS踝与后足功能评分差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;术后1年时,微创组的AOFAS评分为（75.3±2.7）分,明显高于开放组的（68.8±2.5）分,差异有统计学意义（χ2=7.568,P＜0.001）。结论关节镜下踝关节融合术在提高早期骨性融合率及改善足踝功能方面较开放式踝关节融合术更具优势。     

DRG,Costs and Reimbursement following Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: an Economic Appraisal

Background: There is disagreement regarding hospital and physician reimbursement fees when DRG codes are used. We have found that physicians and hospitals are rewarded differently depending on the type of insurance coverage - per diem HMO (Health Maintenance Organization) vs public. Methods: 133 patients were retrospectively analyzed in a single institution. There were 59 privately-insured and 74 publicly-insured patients. Using DRG 288, hospital and surgeon reimbursement rates, complications, length of stay, blood loss and basic demographics were evaluated on all patients. Reimbursement rates were then compared to inpatient hospital costs per case for both open and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP). Statistical analysis used Student's t-test and standard deviation. Results: The 2 groups were similar in terms of age, sex and BMI. There was a large difference in physician reimbursement when comparing public to private insurance ($931±73 vs $2356±822, P<0.001). Likewise, there was a large difference in hospital reimbursement (public $11773 ± 4462 vs private $4435 ± 3106, P<0.001). The estimated costs for open gastric bypass was $3179 vs $4180 for the laparoscopic bypass. The HMO per diem rate was $1000 per day. Conclusion: There is a relative disincentive for surgeons to treat publicly-insured patients, while there is an incentive for hospitals to treat those patients. The converse is true for the privately-insured patients. This dichotomy will impede the development of new centers and place greater burden on bariatric surgeons to reduce cost by performing the open RYGBP.     

The National Trend in Arthroplasty Surgery Location and the Economic Impact on Surgeons,Hospitals and ASCs

BackgroundWe sought to understand the magnitude of the shift in care settings (hospital inpatient, hospital outpatient, or ambulatory surgery center) for primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and its economic impact on surgeons and hospitals.MethodsWe measured the shift in care settings for primary TJAs using national 100% sample Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims data from January 2017 through March 2021. We also measured the percent of case being discharged the same day over time. We calculated the national average hospital payment rate by setting and the weighted average hospital payment rates based on the mix of inpatient and outpatient cases over time. We compared average facility and physician payment rate changes over time across common types of surgeries.ResultsBy the first quarter of 2021, 29% of Medicare FFS primary TJAs were performed hospital inpatient (down from 100% in 2017), 64% were performed hospital outpatient, and about 7% in an ambulatory surgery center. The percent of hospital-based primary TJAs that were discharged the same day increased from less than 2% in the first quarter of 2018 to over 18% in the first quarter of 2021. Medicare increased its payment rates for both inpatient and outpatient TJAs, which offset the impact of TJAs shifting from being performed inpatient to outpatient. The average Medicare payment rates for TJAs declined by more than they did for most other major procedures.ConclusionThere was a significant shift in care setting from hospital inpatient to hospital outpatient for Medicare primary TJAs. This shift led to lower average TJA payment rates to hospitals; however, the impact was attenuated due to the increasing Medicare reimbursement rates in each setting, particularly for outpatient cases.     

Arthroscopic Ankle Arthrodesis for End-Stage Tuberculosis of the Ankle: A 2-Year Follow-Up

Surgical treatment for end-stage ankle joint tuberculosis (TB) has rarely been reported. This study followed cases treated by arthroscopic arthrodesis for ankle joint TB to evaluate its efficacy and safety in the clinic. Patients who underwent arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis for ankle joint TB between April 11, 2010, and December 31, 2016, were followed. Their diagnoses were confirmed by bacterial culture or pathological examination. During arthroscopy, tissue samples were first obtained to further confirm the diagnosis. Then the necrotic tissue, hyperplasia of synovial tissue, and exfoliated cartilage were removed. Ankle joint arthrodesis was performed if the area of articular cartilage damage was >2 cm². Continued nutritional support and standardized anti-TB drug treatment were given after surgery. Follow-up measurements included visual analogue scale score, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and radiographic imaging. All 9 patients in this study, with an average age of 54 (range 37 to 68) years, were followed. The mean follow-up duration was 55.44 ± 31.15 (range 24 to 96) months. There were significant differences in the visual analogue scale scores, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate between before treatment and 18 months postoperatively (p < .05). All patients (100%) showed union at 18 ± 4 weeks. Arthroscopic treatment for ankle joint TB has the advantages of minor trauma and low complications. It can be used to accurately obtain samples from specific areas of TB for further diagnosis. According to the degree of articular cartilage damage, the surgeon can determine whether to perform arthrodesis. Thorough debridement of necrotic tissue and residual articular cartilage on the fusion surface can improve the rate of ankle fusion.     

踝关节融合术对足踝创伤性关节炎的治疗研究

目的：观察关节镜下微创踝关节融合术与开放式踝关节融合术治疗创伤性关节炎的疗效。方法：回顾性分析26例创伤性踝关节炎患者的临床资料,按治疗方法不同分为微创组和开放式组,对比两组骨性融合率及术后美国足踝外科协会踝-后足评分系统(AOFAS,Ankle Hindfoot Scale)评分。结果：术后6个月微创组骨性融合率为80.0%,高于开放式组的31.3%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后1年两组骨性融合率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后6个月两组AOFAS评分差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),术后1年时微创组评分明显高于开放式组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论：关节镜下踝关节融合术在提高早期骨性融合率及减轻疼痛方面较开放式踝关节融合术更具优势。     

Clinical outcomes comparing arthroscopic vs open ankle arthrodesis

BackgroundOver the last twenty years, minimally invasive ankle arthrodesis has evolved into a well-tolerated and safe procedure. It has grown in favor to open ankle arthrodesis due to shorter length of stay and fewer complications recorded. This paper aims to compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic vs open ankle arthrodesis at 24-months followup.MethodsFrom 2004 to 2015, we reviewed a prospectively collected database in a tertiary hospital foot and ankle registry. 28 feet that underwent arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis were matched to 56 feet that underwent open ankle arthrodesis for age, sex and body mass index (BMI). Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-hindfoot Scores and Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were obtained to assess clinical outcomes. These parameters were collected before surgery, at 6 months and 24 months after surgery.ResultsThe arthroscopic group demonstrated significant less pain in the perioperative period (arthroscopic: 1.9 ± 1.2, open: 3.8 ± 1.1, p < 0.001) and shorter length of hospitalization stay (arthroscopic: 2.1 ± 0.7 open: 3.5 ± 1.7, p < 0.001). Patients who underwent arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis also reported a higher SF-36 score on physical functioning at 6 months (arthroscopic: 58.4 ± 27.1, open: 47.1 ± 24.0, p < 0.05) and higher AOFAS Ankle-hindfoot Scale score at 24-months (arthroscopic: 78.9 ± 18.9, open: 68.9 ± 24.7, p < 0.05). There were no postoperative complications in the arthroscopic group but 11 in the open group, including 9 which required followup operations. There was no significant difference in length of operative procedure between both groups.ConclusionsWe conclude that the arthroscopic group displayed better clinical outcomes compared to the open group at the 24 months followup. The advantages of arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis include significantly less perioperative pain, higher AOFAS Ankle-hindfoot scores at 24 months, shorter length of stay, fewer postoperative complications and followup operations.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative series.     

关节镜辅助踝关节融合术治疗晚期创伤性踝关节炎

 目的 探讨关节镜辅助踝关节融合术对保守治疗无效的晚期创伤性踝关节炎的治疗价值。方法 2007年7月至2010年12月,采用关节镜辅助踝关节融合术治疗晚期创伤性踝关节炎21例,男14例,女7例;年龄21～68岁,平均(37±13)岁。均为单侧手术。首次踝关节外伤至踝关节融合术的时间为1~41年,平均12.6年。患者术前均接受保守治疗无效,疼痛明显。术中彻底清除关节面软骨,行关节端“微骨折”处理,初步复位后以克氏针临时固定;“C”型臂X线机透视确认位置,拧入空心螺钉固定。2例同期行关节镜辅助距下关节融合术。术后石膏固定6~10周,部分负重锻炼直至骨性愈合。结果 全部患者获得随访,随访时间1～4年,平均1.8年。术后10~16周骨性愈合,平均12周。步态均得到改善,无切口愈合不良和感染等早期并发症。3例单纯踝关节融合患者术后出现距下关节炎伴疼痛,2例经保守治疗后症状缓解、1例行开放距下关节融合术后症状缓解。术前疼痛视觉模拟评分平均(8.1±1.5)分,术后1年平均(2.7±1.1)分,差异有统计学意义(t=3.153,P=0.005)。结论 对晚期创伤性踝关节炎,关节镜辅助踝关节融合术创伤小、切口小、融合率高,但对设备条件要求高,掌握该技术需要一定的学习曲线。     

Outpatient Versus Inpatient Surgical Fixation of Isolated Ankle Fractures: An Analysis of 90-Day Complications,Readmissions, and Costs

Despite increasing interest toward managing isolated ankle fractures in an outpatient setting, evidence of its safety remains largely limited. The 2007 to 2014 Humana Administrative Claims database was queried to identify patients undergoing open reduction internal fixation for unimalleolar, bimalleolar, or trimalleolar isolated closed ankle fractures. Two cohorts (outpatient versus inpatient) were then matched on the basis of age, sex, race, region, fracture type (uni-/bi-/trimalleolar) and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index to control for selection bias. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to report independent impact of outpatient-treated ankle fracture surgery on 90-day complications, readmission, and emergency department visit rates. Independent-samples t test was used to compare global 90-day costs between cohorts. A total of 5317 inpatient-treated and 6941 outpatient-treated closed ankle fractures were included in the final cohort. After matching and multivariate analyses, patients with outpatient ankle fractures, compared with patients with inpatient ankle fractures, had statistically lower rates of pneumonia (2.3% versus 4.0%; p < .001), myocardial infarction (0.9% versus 1.8%; p = .005), acute renal failure (2.2% versus 5.3%; p < .001), urinary tract infections (7.4% versus 12.3%; p < .001), and pressure ulcers (0.9% versus 2.0%; p = .001). Outpatient ankle fractures also had lower rates of 90-day readmissions (9.7% versus 14.1%; p < .001) and emergency department visits (13.8% versus 16.2%; p = .028). Last, overall 90-day costs for outpatient ankle fractures were nearly $9000 lower than costs for inpatient ankle fractures ($12,923 versus $21,866; p < .001). Based on our findings, it appears that outpatient treatment of ankle fractures can be deemed safe and feasible in a select cohort of patients.     

Comparison of institutional costs for laparoscopic preperitoneal inguinal hernia versus open repair and its reimbursement in an ambulatory surgery center

OBJECTIVE: To compare institutional costs for open versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair and its relationship to reimbursement in an ambulatory surgery center in the United States. METHOD: Analysis of institutional costs in US$ of 2006 for all nonreusables used in a laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair using a polyester mesh compared with open hernia repair using polypropylene mesh. A comparison of the institution's disposable costs related to reimbursement at an ambulatory surgery center in Southeastern United States was performed to identify the most cost-effective procedure for the outpatient facility. RESULTS: As fixed and indirect costs of the ambulatory surgery center are similar for both procedures, a cost difference can only be found in direct disposable costs with that being US$ 235.57 for the procedure-specific disposables in the laparoscopic hernia repair as compared with US$ 117.15 for the open hernia repair. Cost for identical disposables used in both procedures amounted to US$ 32.57. Laparoscopic TEP hernia repair has a higher cost for procedure related disposables versus the open hernia repair at +US$ 118.42 mainly being due to the more costly polyester mesh. A flat rate reimbursement of US$ 1800 for a laparoscopic procedure compared with only US$ 950 for the open procedure minus all disposable cost results in a higher institutional income of +US&$ 731.58 (US$ 1531.86 vs. US$ 800.28), from which other institutional costs can be paid. CONCLUSIONS: Despite marginally higher procedure-related disposable costs for laparoscopic TEP hernia repair, the institutional income is remarkably higher owing to a better reimbursement for this procedure in ambulatory surgery centers. From the institution's point of view, laparoscopic hernia repair is by far the more cost-effective procedure when compared with an open hernia procedure at the present time.     

Effectiveness of Arthroscopically Assisted Surgery for Ankle Arthrodesis

Regarding the treatment of ankle arthritis, the choice of arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis (AAA) or open ankle arthrodesis (OAA) remains controversial. To guide clinical decision-making, we conducted a meta-analysis on the optimal treatment of ankle arthrodesis. We identified eligible studies published from June 1, 1969 to June 1, 2020 using the Cochrane Library, PubMed, OVID, Embase, and Medline searched the references of relevant studies. Randomized and non-randomized studies that compared outcomes of AAA and OAA were included. After the methodologic assessment, available data were extracted and statistically reviewed. The primary outcomes were overall complications rate, tourniquet time, length of the hospital stay, non-union rate, and rate to fusion. The secondary outcomes were delayed union and postoperative infection rate. We included 9 studies comparing arthroscopic and open in patients with ankle arthrodesis, comprising 467 participants. AAA had the advantage of demonstrating a lower overall complication rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.44 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.73]; p = .002), shorter intraoperative tourniquet time (mean difference [MD], -16.49 [95% CI, -23.51 to -9.46]; p < .001), shorter length of the hospital stay (MD -1.75, 95% CI -1.94 to -1.2, p < .001),lower non-union rate (OR, -0.07 [95% CI, -0.13 to -0.02]; p <.01) and higher rate to fusion (OR, 4.2 [95% CI, 1.96-8.99]; p < .001) in comparison with OAA. Yet, no significant differences were found in delayed union (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.10-2.04]; p = .30) and postoperative infection rate (OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.17-1.15]; p = .09) between the groups. Our results suggest that arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis is superior to open ankle arthrodesis alone in the treatment of ankle arthritis based on the overall complication rate, intraoperative tourniquet time, length of the hospital stay, non-union rate and rate to fusion. However, further high-quality randomized controlled trials with appropriate blinding methods are needed to confirm the findings.     

Outpatient anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an analysis of charges and perioperative complications

All outpatient anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions using patellar tendon autograft performed at an accredited outpatient surgical center between 1994 and 1998 were prospectively studied. Hospital charges pertaining to the procedures were examined, and perioperative morbidities that might be attributed to an outpatient procedure were evaluated. The study group comprised 284 patients; average patient age at surgery was 28.7 years. Patients were subgrouped into group 1 (isolated ACL reconstructions; n=163), group 2 (ACL reconstructions and meniscal repair; n=48), and group 3 (ACL reconstructions and partial meniscectomy; n=73). Surgicenter facility charges, reoperation rate, complication rate, motion, pain management, hospital emergency room visits, hospital admission, and outpatient surgical facility visits were analyzed. Historical controls from our hospital and our initial outpatient pilot study (May 1994 through November 1995) were used as financial controls. The average surgical center charge for all patients was $3,443. On average, there was a $600 increase for all subgroups from May 1994 through November 1995 compared to December 1995 through August 1998. In the latter time interval, the fixed facility charges were $3,150, $4,075, and $4,275 for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Overall, 19 (7%) patients required a reoperation including 7 (2.5%) patients who required arthroscopic debridement for symptomatic motion deficits. This study expands on our initial published report regarding hospital charges pertaining to an outpatient ACL reconstruction. Extended over another 4 years, we noted slight increases reflective of regional inflationary increases. Compared to our initial inpatient study (1988-1993), significant charge reductions were maintained. This study demonstrated a low complication rate and high patient subjective satisfaction level.     

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair is financially viable at a high-volume medical center with positive hospital contribution margins and physician payment

ObjectiveTo examine hospital finances and physician payment associated with fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) for complex aortic disease at a high-volume center and to compare the costs and reimbursements for FEVAR with open repair, and their trends over time.MethodsClinical and financial data were collected retrospectively from electronic medical and administrative records. Data for each patient included inpatient and outpatient encounters 3 months before and 12 months after the primary aneurysm operation.ResultsBetween 2007 and 2017, 157 and 71 patients were treated with physician-modified endograft (PMEG) and Cook Zenith Fenestrated (ZFEN) repair, respectively. Twenty-one patients who were evaluated for FEVAR underwent open repair instead. The 228 FEVAR patients provided a total positive contribution margin (reimbursements minus direct costs) of $2.65 million. The index encounter (the primary aneurysm operation and hospitalization) accounted for the majority (90.6%) of the total contribution margin. The largest component (50.3%) of direct cost for FEVAR from the index encounter was implant/graft expenses. The average direct costs for FEVAR and for open repair from the index encounter were $34,688 and $35,020, respectively. The average contribution margins for FEVAR and for open repair were approximately $10,548 and $21,349, respectively, attributable to differences in reimbursement. The average direct cost for FEVAR trended down over time as cumulative experience increased. Average reimbursement for FEVAR increased after Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services approved payments with the Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) trial for PMEG in 2011, and a new technology add-on payment for ZFEN in 2012. These factors transitioned the average contribution margin from negative to positive in 2012. The average physician payments for PMEG increased from $128 to $5848 after the start of the IDE trial. The average physician payments for ZFEN and for open repair between 2011 and 2017 were $7597 and $7781, respectively.ConclusionsFEVAR can be performed at a high-volume medical center with positive contribution margins and with comparable physician payments to open repair. At this institution, hospital reimbursement and physician payments improved for PMEG with participation in an IDE trial, while hospital direct costs decreased for both PMEG and ZFEN with accumulated experience.     

Arthroscopic versus open ankle arthrodesis

Background

It is thought that arthroscopic ankle fusion offers improved outcomes over open fusion in terms of functional outcomes, time to fusion, length of stay and fewer complications. However, there are doubts about whether correction of established severe deformity can be achieved using the arthroscopic approach.

Editorial Commentary: Does It Matter Which Way I Fuse Your Ankle: Arthroscopically or Open? I Hope So!

Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis is the treatment method of choice to achieve good clinical scores, faster time to union, fewer complications, and shorter hospital stay. However, the union rate, reoperation rate, and operative time are similar to open arthrodesis. The choice of which method to use for arthrodesis is influenced by surgeon preference and experience, clinical presentation, and equipment availability. Overall, we must choose the method of ankle arthrodesis that gives the best result with the least morbidity to the patient.     

Arthrodesis of the ankle in the presence of a large deformity in the coronal plane

A consecutive series of 23 patients (25 ankles) with osteoarthritis of the ankle and severe varus or valgus deformity were treated by open arthrodesis using compression screws. Primary union was achieved in 24 ankles one required further surgery to obtain a solid fusion. The high level of satisfaction in this group of patients reinforces the view that open arthrodesis, as opposed to ankle replacement or arthroscopic arthrodesis, continues to be the treatment of choice when there is severe varus or valgus deformity associated with the arthritis.     

Open versus arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis: a comparative study.

A retrospective review was undertaken for 36 patients who underwent ankle arthrodesis. Nineteen patients underwent an arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis, and 17 patients underwent an open arthrodesis. Only patients with limited angular deformities were suitable candidates for an arthroscopic arthrodesis. The open arthrodesis group inclusion criteria were defined by the maximum coronal and sagittal plane deformity in the arthroscopic group. Perioperative parameters were compared and analyzed. Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis yielded comparable fusion rates to open ankle arthrodesis, with significantly less morbidity, shorter operative times, shorter tourniquet times, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stays. Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis is a valid alternative to traditional open arthrodesis of the ankle for selected patients with ankle arthritis.     

The Safety Profile of Same-Day Outpatient Total Ankle Arthroplasty

There has been significant change in the health care policy in the United States in recent years with an increasing focus on health care costs and patient satisfaction. One strategy of cost containment is to transition outpatient surgery away from high cost hospital environments. Total ankle arthroplasty has begun the evolution to outpatient settings; however, there is limited published literature on the results of outpatient total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). The purpose of the present study was to review the safety profile of same day outpatient TAA at an ambulatory surgery center. A review of consecutive patients who underwent same day outpatient TAA for end-stage ankle arthritis with a minimum of 12 months’ follow-up was performed. The primary outcomes assessed were the incidence of perioperative adverse medical events, hospital admissions related to the procedure, and postoperative complications (minor and major). Univariate analyses were performed. Fifty-one patients who underwent same-day TAA between June 2016 and July 2018 were included; mean follow-up was 20.7 months (± 7.6). The mean age at time of surgery was 56.5 years (± 7.2), with a mean body mass index of 30.4 (± 5.3). Overall, there were no perioperative adverse medical events or hospital admissions related to the procedure. Five minor complications (9.8%) and 7 major (13.7%) were recorded. Of the major complications, only 1 required TAA revision. Implant survivorship during the most recent follow-up was 98%. The present study suggests that TAA can be performed safely in an outpatient ambulatory setting. Additional comparative studies with larger TAA cohorts and patient reported outcomes are warranted.