Utilization of and Outcomes Associated with Intravascular Ultrasound during Deep Venous Stent Placement among Medicare Beneficiaries

PurposeTo evaluate temporal trends, practice variation, and associated outcomes with the use of intravascular ultrasound (US) during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries.Materials and MethodsAll lower extremity deep venous stent placement procedures performed between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019 among Medicare beneficiaries were included. Temporal trends in intravascular US use were stratified by procedural setting and physician specialty. The primary outcome was a composite of 12-month all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, or repeat target vessel intervention. The secondary outcome was a composite of 12-month stent thrombosis, embolization, or restenosis.ResultsAmong the 20,984 deep venous interventions performed during the study period, 15,184 (72.4%) utilized intravascular US. Moderate growth in intravascular US use was observed during the study period in all clinical settings. There was a variation in the use of intravascular US among all operators (median, 77.3% of cases; interquartile range, 20.0%–99.2%). In weighted analyses, intravascular US use during deep venous stent placement was associated with a lower risk of both the primary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69–0.76; P < .001) and secondary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.27–0.39; P < .001) composite end points.ConclusionsIntravascular US is frequently used during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries, with further increase in use from 2017 to 2019. The utilization of intravascular US as part of a procedural strategy was associated with a lower cumulative incidence of adverse outcomes after the procedure, including venous stent thrombosis and embolization.     

超声及应变式弹性成像预测超声引导下腘静脉置入血管鞘用于治疗下肢深静脉血栓形成成功与否

目的 分析超声及应变式弹性成像预测超声引导下置入腘静脉血管鞘治疗下肢深静脉血栓形成(DVT)成功与否的价值。方法 回顾性分析103例接受超声引导下置入患侧腘静脉血管鞘的DVT患者的术前超声资料,比较置入血管鞘失败与成功病例腘静脉超声及应变式弹性成像表现差异;绘制差异有统计学意义超声参数的受试者工作特征曲线,获得其预测血管鞘置入失败的阈值,对每个参数阈值赋值1分,得到联合超声评分,以实际置入结果为标准,评价超声单一参数及联合评分的预测效能。结果 103例中,对100例行单侧、3例行双侧腘静脉置入血管鞘,包括左侧腘静脉71支、右侧35支,共106支腘静脉;对其中95支腘静脉置入血管鞘成功(成功组),11支失败(失败组)。相比成功组,失败组腘静脉内径及腘静脉与腘动脉内径比值均较小,血栓为等或高回声,与血管壁边界模糊,腘静脉应变式弹性评分为硬。以超声单一参数及联合评分预测置入血管鞘成功与否的曲线下面积分别为0.909、0.926、0.865、0.899、0.958及0.940(P均＜0.001)。结论 患侧腘静脉超声及应变式弹性成像能有效预测对下肢DVT患者行超声引导下置入腘静脉血管鞘成功与否。     

Characterizing Standardized Functional Data at Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities

ObjectiveThe Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 mandates using standardized patient functional data across post-acute settings. This study characterized similarities and differences in clinician-observed scores of self-care and transfer items for the standardized section GG functional domain and the functional independent measure (FIM) at inpatient rehabilitation facilities.DesignWe conducted secondary analyses of 2017 Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation national data. Patients were assessed by clinicians on both section GG and FIM at admission and discharge. We identified 7 self-care items and 6 transfer items in section GG conceptually equivalent with FIM. Clinician-assessed scores for each pair of items were examined using score distributions, Bland-Altman plot, correlation (Pearson coefficients), and agreement (kappa and weighted kappa) analyses.Setting and ParticipantsIn all, 408,491 patients were admitted to Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation-affiliated inpatient rehabilitation facilities with one of the following impairments: stroke, brain dysfunction, neurologic condition, orthopedic disorders, and debility.MeasuresSection GG and FIM.ResultsPatients were scored as more functionally independent in section GG compared with FIM, but change score distributions and score orders within impairment groups were similar. Total scores in section GG had strong positive correlations (self-care: r = 0.87 and 0.95; transfer: r = 0.82 and 0.90 at admission and discharge, respectively) with total FIM scores. Weak to moderate ranking agreements with total FIM scores were observed (self-care: kappa = 0.49 and 0.60; transfers: kappa = 0.43 and 0.52 at admission and discharge, respectively). Lower agreements were observed for less able patients at admission and for higher ability patients of their change scores.Conclusions and ImplicationsOverall, response patterns were similar in section GG and FIM across impairments. However, variations exist in score distributions and ranking agreement. Future research should examine the use of GG codes to maintain effective care, outcomes, and unbiased reimbursement across post-acute settings.