Reductions in Reimbursement and Relative Value Units for Interventional Radiology Procedures: Trends from 2011 to 2021 Compared with Those for Other Physician Specialties

PurposeTo compare recent trends in Medicare reimbursement and relative value units (RVUs) for interventional radiology (IR) procedures similar to those performed by non-IR specialties.Materials and MethodsData from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Fee Schedule for facility reimbursement and RVU component values for 23 commonly performed single Current Procedural Terminology IR procedures were compared with similar procedures or procedures for similar indications performed by non-IR specialties between 2011 and 2021.ResultsThe work RVU component decreased in 18 of 23 (78.3%) IR procedures compared with 6 of 23 (26.1%) similar procedures performed by non-IR specialties. The largest change in single RVU component was a 19.2% reduction in practice expense RVU for IR compared with a 16.5% reduction for similar procedures performed by non-IR specialties.ConclusionsAs a specialty, IR experienced a disproportionately greater reduction in reimbursement and RVU valuation for a range of comparable procedures performed by non-IR specialties.     

Association between Baseline Osteoarthritic Features on MR Imaging and Clinical Outcome after Genicular Artery Embolization for Knee Osteoarthritis

PurposeTo explore the association between baseline osteoarthritis (OA)-related magnetic resonance (MR) imaging features and pain reduction after genicular artery embolization (GAE) in patients with mild-to-moderate symptomatic knee OA resistant to conservative therapy.Materials and MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of patients with mild-to-moderate symptomatic knee OA treated with GAE using imipenem-cilastatin sodium. The clinical outcome was scored at baseline and 6 months after treatment using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). MR images were scored using the MR imaging osteoarthritis knee score. Linear regression was used to evaluate associations of before-treatment MR imaging scores with WOMAC_pain and WOMAC_total reduction after 6 months.ResultsFifty-four patients (22.2% male; median age, 69.4 years; median WOMAC_pain at baseline, 12) were evaluated. Of all OA features scored, a higher cartilage full-thickness defect score showed the strongest association with less reduction of both WOMAC_pain (B,?0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI), ?0.91 to ?0.34]; P < .001) and WOMAC_total scores (B, ?1.77 [95% CI, ?2.87 to ?0.67]; P < .001) following treatment. The presence of grade 2–3 effusion synovitis (B, ?2.99 [95% CI, ?5.39 to ?0.60]) bone marrow lesions (B, ?0.52 [95% CI, ?0.86 to ?0.19]), osteophytes (B, ?0.21 [95% CI, ?0.36 to ?0.06]), and cartilage defect surface area score (B, ?0.25 [95% CI ?0.42 to ?0.08]) all showed a significant association with less WOMAC_pain reduction (all P < .05).ConclusionsIn patients with mild-to-moderate symptomatic knee OA treated with GAE, the presence and severity of full-thickness cartilage defects, effusion synovitis, bone marrow lesions, osteophytes, and cartilage surface area scores at baseline are associated with less favorable clinical outcomes at 6 months.     

Financial Effect of Unbundling Moderate Sedation from Procedural Codes in Radiology

PurposeTo assess and quantify the financial effect of unbundling newly unbundled moderate sedation codes across major payors at an academic radiology practice.Materials and MethodsBilling and reimbursement data for 23 months of unbundled moderate sedation codes were analyzed for reimbursement rates and trends. This included 10,481 and 28,189 units billed and $443,257 and $226,444 total receipts for codes 99152 (initial 15 minutes of moderate sedation) and 99153 (each subsequent 15 minute increment of moderate sedation), respectively. Five index procedures—(i) central venous port placement, (ii) endovascular tumor embolization, (iii) tunneled central venous catheter placement, (iv) percutaneous gastrostomy placement, and (v) percutaneous nephrostomy placement—were identified, and moderate sedation reimbursements for Medicare and the dominant private payor were calculated and compared to pre-bundled reimbursements. Revenue variation models across different patient insurance mixes were then created using averages from 4 common practice settings among radiologists (independent practices, all hospitals, safety-net hospitals, and non-safety-net hospitals).ResultsDepartmental reimbursement for unbundled moderate sedation in FY2018 and FY2019 totaled $669,701.34, with high per-unit variability across payors, especially for code 99153. Across the 5 index procedures, moderate sedation reimbursement decreased 1.3% after unbundling and accounted for 3.9% of procedural revenue from Medicare and increased 11.9% and accounted for 5.5% of procedural revenue from the dominant private payor. Between different patient insurance mix models, estimated reimbursement from moderate sedation varied by as much as 29.9%.ConclusionsDepartmental reimbursement from billing the new unbundled moderate sedation codes was sizable and heterogeneous, highlighting the need for consistent and accurate reporting of moderate sedation. Total collections vary by case mix, patient insurance mix, and negotiated reimbursement rates.     

Experience with Compressed Gelfoam Plugs in Children during Liver Biopsies and Other IR Procedures: A Retrospective Single-Center Case Series

PurposeTo analyze the experience using compressed gelfoam plugs (CGPs) in children during liver biopsies and other interventional procedures.Materials and MethodsThis was a single-center, retrospective, consecutive case series of 477 various pediatric interventional radiology procedures using CGPs (January 2012 to December 2016) performed on 397 children (209 males, 188 females; median age, 7 years [range, 9 days–17.8 years]; median weight, 18 kg [range, 2.7–141 kg]). Of 477 procedures, most (n = 371) were liver biopsies, 98 were biopsies of other organs, and 8 were non-biopsy procedures. Analysis focused on liver biopsies.ResultsOf liver biopsies, a median of 2 CGPs were used per procedure, and the mean drop in hemoglobin was -0.36 g/dl (-3.0% change). Thirty-seven mild, 8 moderate, 2 severe, and 1 life-threatening (an anaphylaxis to CGP) adverse events (AEs) occurred. Analysis of liver biopsies with AEs showed significant association between number of passes, cores, and focal-type lesions (unadjusted logistic regression: P = .007, P = .022, P = .028, respectively) and age, weight, and number of passes (adjusted multiple logistic regression: P = .006, P = .032, P = .046, respectively). Technical problems relating to CGP deployment were noted in 5 (1%), without any AEs.ConclusionsCGPs were used in a wide variety of procedures and organs in children. There was 1 life-threatening AE resulting from the rare risk of anaphylaxis caused by the gelfoam-containing plug. After liver biopsies, transfusion was required in 2/371 (0.5%) procedures, 1 related to pre-biopsy anemia (0.25%).     

Current Interventional Radiology-Related Benchmarked Clinical Quality Measures Are Less Likely to be “Capped” Than Diagnostic Radiology Clinical Quality Measures

In the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS), quality measures are considered topped out if national median performance rates are ≥95%. Quality measures worth 10 points can be capped at 7 points if topped out for ≥2 years. This report compares the availability of diagnostic radiology (DR)-related and interventional radiology (IR)-related measures worth 10 points. A total of 196 MIPS clinical quality measures were reviewed on the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services MIPS website. There are significantly more IR-related measures worth 10 points than DR measures (2/9 DR measures vs 9/12 IR measures; P = .03), demonstrating that clinical IR services can help mixed IR/DR groups maximize their Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services payment adjustment.     

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.     

Correlation and Agreement of Yttrium-90 Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography with Ex Vivo Radioembolization Microsphere Deposition in the Rabbit VX2 Liver Tumor Model

PurposeTo demonstrate a stronger correlation and agreement of yttrium-90 (⁹⁰Y) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) measurements with explant liver tumor dosing compared with the standard model (SM) for radioembolization.Materials and MethodsHepatic VX2 tumors were implanted into New Zealand white rabbits, with growth confirmed by 7 T magnetic resonance imaging. Seventeen VX2 rabbits provided 33 analyzed tumors. Treatment volumes were calculated from manually drawn volumes of interest (VOI) with three-dimensional surface renderings. Radioembolization was performed with glass ⁹⁰Y microspheres. PET/CT imaging was completed with scatter and attenuation correction. Three-dimensional ellipsoid VOI were drawn to encompass tumors on fused images. Tumors and livers were then explanted for inductively coupled plasma (ICP)-optical emission spectroscopy (OES) analysis of microsphere content. ⁹⁰Y PET/CT and SM measurements were compared with reference standard ICP-OES measurements of tumor dosing with Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analyses for agreement testing with and without adjustment for tumor necrosis.ResultsThe median infused activity was 33.3 MBq (range, 5.9–152.9). Tumor dose was significantly correlated with ⁹⁰Y PET/CT measurements (r = 0.903, P < .001) and SM estimates (r = 0.607, P < .001). Bland-Altman analyses showed that the SM tended to underestimate the tumor dosing by a mean of ?8.5 Gy (CI, ?26.3–9.3), and the degree of underestimation increased to a mean of ?18.3 Gy (CI, ?38.5–1.9) after the adjustment for tumor necrosis.Conclusions⁹⁰Y PET/CT estimates were strongly correlated and had better agreement with reference measurements of tumor dosing than SM estimates.     

Liver Tumor Ablation Procedure Duration and Estimated Patient Radiation Dose: Comparing Positron Emission Tomography/CT and CT Guidance

PurposeTo compare procedure duration and patient radiation dose in positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and CT-guided liver tumor ablation procedures.Materials and MethodsIn this retrospective, case-control study, 275 patients underwent 368 image-guided ablation procedures to treat 537 tumors. Radiologists used PET/CT guidance for 117 procedures and CT guidance for 251 procedures. PET/CT-guided procedures were performed by one radiologist (C: P.B.S.). All 3 radiologists (A: J.G.S., B: a radiologist who is not an author on this article, and C: P.B.S.) performed CT-guided procedures. Potential confounders included patient demographics, clinical and tumor characteristics, and procedural variables.ResultsThe mean duration and estimated patient radiation dose of PET/CT-guided procedures performed by radiologist C were 21.5 ± 4.9 minutes longer and 0.7 ± 2.8 mSv higher than CT-guided procedures performed by all radiologists in an unadjusted comparison. Adjusting for confounding, mean duration and estimated dose of PET/CT-guided procedures performed by radiologist C were 28.3 ± 3.8 minutes longer (P < .0001) and 6.2 ± 2.9 mSv higher (P = .03) than CT-guided procedures performed by the same radiologist. Comparing CT-guided procedures performed by all 3 radiologists, adjusted mean durations and estimated patient doses of procedures by the least experienced radiologist, radiologist A, and the second most experienced radiologist, radiologist B, were 24.2 ± 5.1 (P < .0001) and 18.1 ± 8.9 (P = .04) minutes longer and 13.1 ± 3.7 (P < .001) and 14.5 ± 6.4 (P = .02) mSv higher, respectively, than procedures performed by the most experienced radiologist, radiologist C.ConclusionsPET/CT-guided liver ablations had a slightly longer duration with slightly higher estimated patient radiation dose than similar CT-guided liver ablations. Procedure duration and patient dose do not appear to be major impediments to the emerging field of PET/CT-guided tumor ablation.     

The direct costs of coronary CT angiography relative to contrast-enhanced thoracic CT: Time-driven activity-based costing

BackgroundCoronary CT angiography (CCTA) and contrast-enhanced thoracic CT (CECT) are distinctly different diagnostic procedures that involve intravenous contrast-enhanced CT of the chest. The technical component of these procedures is reimbursed at the same rate by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). This study tests the hypothesis that the direct costs of performing these exams are significantly different.MethodsDirect costs for both procedures were measured using a time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) model. The exams were segmented into four phases: preparation, scanning, post-scan monitoring, and image processing. Room occupancy and direct labor times were collected for scans of 54 patients (28 CCTA and 26 CECT studies), in seven medical facilities within the USA and used to impute labor and equipment cost. Contrast material costs were measured directly. Cost differences between the exams were analyzed for significance and variability.ResultsMean CCTA duration was 3.2 times longer than CECT (121 and 37 ​min, respectively. p ​< ​0.01). Mean CCTA direct costs were 3.4 times those of CECT ($189.52 and $55.28, respectively, p ​< ​0.01). Both labor and capital equipment costs for CCTA were significantly more expensive (6.5 and 1.8-fold greater, respectively, p ​< ​0.001). Segmented by procedural phase, CCTA was both longer and more expensive for each (p ​< ​0.01). Mean direct costs for CCTA exceeded the standard CMS technical reimbursement of $182.25 without accounting for indirect or overhead costs.ConclusionThe direct cost of performing CCTA is significantly higher than CECT, and thus reimbursement schedules that treat these procedures similarly undervalue the resources required to perform CCTA and possibly decrease access to the procedure.     

Trends in Percutaneous Embolization Procedures by Radiologists and Other Specialists

PurposeTo evaluate utilization trends in percutaneous embolization among radiologists and nonradiologist providers.Materials and MethodsThe nationwide Medicare Part B fee-for-service databases for 2005–2016 were used to evaluate percutaneous embolization codes. Six codes describing embolization procedures were reviewed. Physician providers were grouped as radiologists, vascular surgeons, cardiologists, nephrologists, other surgeons, and all others.ResultsThe total volume of Medicare percutaneous embolization procedures increased from 20,262 in 2005 to 45,478 in 2016 (+125%). Radiologists performed 13,872 procedures in 2005 (68% of total volume) and 33,254 in 2016 (73% of total volume), a 140% increase in volume. While other specialists also increased the number of cases performed from 2005 to 2016, radiologists strongly predominated, performing 87% of arterial and 30% of venous procedures in 2016, more than any other single specialty. In 2014 and 2015, a sharp increase in venous embolization cases performed by nonradiologists preceded a sharp decrease in 2016, likely the result of complicated billing codes for venous procedures. Radiologists maintained a steady upward trend in the number of cases they performed during those years.ConclusionsThe volume of percutaneous embolization procedures performed in the Medicare population increased from 2005 to 2016, reflecting a trend toward minimally invasive intervention. In 2016, radiologists performed nearly 10 times more arterial embolization procedures than the second highest specialty and more venous embolization procedures than any other single specialty.     

Recent Trends in Clinical Setting and Provider Specialty for Endovascular Peripheral Artery Disease Interventions for the Medicare Population

PurposeTo describe national trends in peripheral endovascular interventions by physician specialty, anatomic segment of disease, and clinical location of service.Materials and MethodsCurrent Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify claims for peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) in 2011–2017 Physician Supplier Procedure Summary master files, which contain 100% Part B Medicare billing. Market share was defined as enrollment-adjusted proportion of billed PVI services for each specialty. Annual volume of billed services was additionally evaluated by clinical location (inpatient, outpatient, office-based laboratories) and anatomic segment of disease (iliac, femoral/popliteal, infrapopliteal).ResultsAggregate PVI claims increased 31.3%, from 227,091 in 2011 to 298,127 in 2017. Annual market share remained relatively stable for all specialties: surgery, 48.3%–49.6%; cardiology, 37.2%–35.1%; radiology, 12.8%–13.3%. Accounting for Medicare enrollment, the volume of iliac interventions decreased by 18% over the study period, while femoral/popliteal interventions increased modestly (+7.5%) and infrapopliteal interventions increased (+46%). The greatest proportional increase in infrapopliteal claims occurred among radiologists (surgeons +40.4%, cardiologists +32.1%, radiologists +106.6%). Adjusting for enrollment, claims from office-based laboratories increased substantially (+305.7%), while hospital-based billing decreased (inpatient −25.7%, outpatient −12.9%). Office-based laboratory utilization increased dramatically with all specialties (surgery +331.8%, cardiology +256.0%, radiology +475.7%).ConclusionsUtilization of PVIs continues to increase, while specialty market shares have stabilized since 2011, leaving surgeons and cardiologists as the major providers of endovascular peripheral artery disease care. The greatest relative increases are occurring in infrapopliteal interventions and office-based laboratory procedures, where radiologist involvement has increased dramatically.     

Nationwide Trends in Catheter-Directed Therapy Utilization for the Treatment of Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis in Medicare Beneficiaries

PurposeTo determine overall and provider specialty trends in the use of catheter-directed therapy for lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) treatment in the Medicare population.Materials and MethodsUsing data obtained from 2007–2017 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 5% research identifiable files, all claims associated with acute and chronic lower extremity DVT were identified. The annual volume of 2 services—venous percutaneous transluminal thrombectomy (current procedural terminology [CPT] code 37187) and venous infusion for thrombolysis (CPT code 37201 from 2007 to 2012 and CPT code 37212 from 2013 to 2017)—was examined for trends in DVT intervention. Utilization rates based on region and the place of service were calculated. The results were further categorized based on primary operator type (radiology, cardiology, surgery, and other).ResultsThe total number of DVT interventions increased over time, with 4.27 service counts per 100,000 beneficiaries in 2007 increasing to 13.4 by 2017, a growth rate of 12.09%. Radiologists performed the majority of interventions each year, except in 2013, in which they performed 46.6% of interventions, whereas surgeons and cardiologists combined performed the other 53.4%. In 2017, radiologists performed 7.56 services per 100,000 beneficiaries, which was 56.8% of the total count, more than those performed by surgeons, cardiologists, and unspecified providers combined.ConclusionsCatheter-directed therapy is increasingly being used for the treatment of DVT, with its use undergoing a nearly 12-fold increase from 2007 to 2017 in the Medicare population. Radiologists remained the dominant provider of these services throughout the majority of study period, with a relative reduction in market share from 72% in 2007 to 57% in 2017.     

Effectiveness of Thermal Ablation for Aldosterone-Producing Adrenal Adenoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Biochemical Parameters

PurposeTo assess the effectiveness of thermal ablation for aldosterone-producing adrenal adenoma.Materials and MethodsA systematic search of the PubMed and CINAHL databases was performed to identify studies of thermal ablation for adrenal adenomas. Random effects meta-analysis models were used to compare pre- and post-treatment values of the following outcomes: systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), use of antihypertensive medications, and biochemical parameters (plasma aldosterone levels, aldosterone-to-renin ratio, and potassium levels). The rate of hypertension (HTN) resolution and improvement were also evaluated.ResultsA total of 89 patients from 7 studies were included in the analysis. The mean postablation follow-up duration was 45.8 months. Pooled data analysis revealed a statistically significant decrease in SBP (−29.06 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI], −33.93 to −24.19), DBP (−16.03 mm Hg; 95% CI, −18.33 to −13.73), and the number of antihypertensive medications used (−1.43; 95% CI, −1.97 to −0.89) after ablation. Biochemical parameters had returned to normal ranges after ablation in all studies. The cumulative rate of resolution or improvement in HTN status was 75.3%. On metaregression analysis, there was no statistically significant association between postablation blood pressure changes or serum aldosterone levels and study follow-up duration.ConclusionsThermal ablation for aldosterone-producing adrenal adenoma can be effective in controlling blood pressure, reducing the need for antihypertensive medications, and normalizing hormone secretion. Further higher-quality evidence is needed to confirm these results.     

Interventional Radiologists Achieve Equivalent Outcomes and Lower Costs for Totally Implantable Venous Access Device Placement Compared to Operating Room Placement

PurposeTo compare the cost and outcomes of surgical and interventional radiology (IR) placement of totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) within a large regional health system to determine the service line with better outcomes and lower costs to the health system.Materials and MethodsA retrospective review of all chest port placements performed in the operating room (OR) and IR suite over 12 months was conducted at a large, integrated health system with 6 major hospitals. Secondary electronic health record and cost data were used to identify TIVAD placements, follow-up procedures indicating port malfunction, early adverse events (within 1 month after the surgery), late adverse events (2–12 months after the procedure), and health system cost of TIVAD placement and management.ResultsFor 799 total port placements included in this analysis, the rate of major adverse events was 1.3% and 1.9% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the early follow-up (P = .5655) and 4.9% and 2.8% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the late follow-up (P = .5437). Malfunction-related follow-up procedure rates were 1.8% and 2.6% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the early follow-up (P = .4787) and 12.4% and 10.5% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the late follow-up (P = .4354). The mean cost of port placement per patient was $4,509 and $5,247 for the IR and OR groups, respectively. The difference in per-patient cost of port placement was $1,170 greater for the OR group (P = .0074).ConclusionsThe similar rates of adverse events and follow-up procedures and significant differences in insertion cost suggest that IR TIVAD placement may be more cost effective than surgical placement without affecting the quality.     

Completeness of Reporting in Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials Assessing Interventional Radiology for Liver Disease

PurposeTo assess the completeness of reporting in abstracts of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing interventional radiology (IR) for liver disease; to assess whether publication of the 2017 CONSORT update for nonpharmacologic treatments (NPTs) resulted in changes in abstract reporting; and to identify factors associated with better reporting.Materials and MethodsMEDLINE and Embase were searched to identify RCTs of IR for liver disease (January 2015 to September 2020). Two reviewers assessed the completeness of abstract reporting according to the CONSORT-NPT-2017-update. The primary outcome was the mean number of CONSORT items completely reported among 10 items reported in <50% of the abstracts published in 2015. A time series analysis assessed the evolution trend over time. Moreover, a multivariate regression model was used to identify factors associated with better reporting.ResultsA total of 107 abstracts of RCTs published in 61 journals were included. Overall, 74% (45/61) of journals endorsed the main CONSORT guidelines, of which 60% (27/45) had a policy to implement them. The mean number of primary outcome items completely reported increased by 0.19 over the study period. The publication of the CONSORT-NPT update did not lead to an increase in the trend of items reported (increase of 0.04 items/month before vs 0.02 after; P = .41). Factors associated with more complete reporting were impact factor (OR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.07–1.18) and endorsement of CONSORT with an implementation policy (OR = 8.29; 95% CI: 2.04–33.65).ConclusionsCompleteness of reporting is incomplete in abstracts of trials of IR liver disease and did not improve after publication of the CONSORT-NPT-2017 update with abstract guidance.     

Single-Use versus Reusable Endoscopes for Percutaneous Biliary Endoscopy with Lithotripsy: Technical Metrics,Clinical Outcomes,and Cost Comparison

PurposeTo compare procedure and fluoroscopy time, technical and clinical success, and costs between single-use and reusable endoscopes in patients undergoing percutaneous biliary endoscopy (PBE) with lithotripsy.Material and MethodsThirty-four patients (67 procedures) were retrospectively included in the study. The patients were treated with PBE for gallstone removal from October 24, 2014, to February 12, 2020, using reusable (28 procedures) or single-use (39 procedures) endoscopes. The procedure time, fluoroscopy time, technical success rate (accessing the biliary system and locating the gallstone), clinical success rate (at least partial gallstone removal), complication rate, and cost of use were compared between the procedures.ResultsThe mean (± standard deviation) procedure time was not significantly different between single-use (136 minutes ± 45) and reusable endoscopes (136 minutes ± 51) (P = .47). The mean fluoroscopy time was significantly shorter for single-use endoscopes (11 minutes ± 8.4) than for reusable endoscopes (18 minutes ± 12) (P = .01). When comparing single-use versus reusable endoscopes, the technical success (95% [n = 37] vs 93% [n = 26]) and the clinical success (90% [n = 35] vs 75% [n = 21]) rates were not significantly different (both, P > .05). Only 1 complication was noted in the reusable endoscope group (P = .42). The cost per case was lower for single-use ($1,500) than for reusable ($3,987) endoscope procedures, primarily due to differences in capital costs and repair costs.ConclusionsSingle-use endoscopes offer the potential for lower patient radiation exposure and lower cost per case, which may reduce the financial barriers to offering PBE in interventional radiology practices. The clinical and technical success rates did not differ by endoscope type.     

Hemodialysis Catheters in Infants: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

PurposeEvaluate technical aspects and outcomes of insertion/maintenance of hemodialysis (HD) central venous catheter (CVC) during infancy.Materials and MethodsSingle-center retrospective study of 29 infants who underwent 49 HD-CVC insertions between 2002 and 2016. Demographics, procedural, and post-procedural details, interventional radiology (IR) maintenance procedures, technical modifications, complications, and outcomes were evaluated. Technical adjustments during HD-CVC placement to adapt catheter length to patient size were labeled “modifications.” CVCs requiring return visit to IR were called IR-maintenance procedures. Mean age and weight at HD-CVC insertion were 117 days and 4.9 kg.ResultsOf the 29 patients, 13 (45%) required renal-replacement-therapy (RRT) as neonates, 10 (34%) commenced RRT with peritoneal dialysis (PD), and 19 (66%) with HD. Fifteen nontunneled and 34 tunneled HD-CVCs were inserted while patients were ≤1 year. Technical modifications were required placing 25/49 (51%) HD-CVCs: 5/15 (33%) nontunneled and 20/34 (59%) tunneled catheters (P = .08). Patients underwent ≤6 dialysis-cycles/patient during infancy (mean 2.3), and a mean of 4.1 and 49 HD-sessions/catheter for nontunneled and tunneled HD-CVCs, respectively. Mean primary and secondary device service, and total access site intervals for tunneled HD-CVCs were 75, 115, and 201 days, respectively. A total of 26 of 49 (53%) patients required IR-maintenance procedures. Nontunneled lines had greater catheter-related bloodstream infections per 1,000 catheter-days than tunneled HD-CVCs (9.25 vs. 0.85/1,000 catheter days; P = .02). Nineteen patients (65%) survived over 1 year. At final evaluation (December 2017): 8/19 survived transplantation, 5/19 remained on RRT, 2/19 completely recovered, 1/19 lost to follow-up, and 3 died at 1.3, 2, and 10 years.ConclusionsPlacement/maintenance of HD-CVCs in infants pose specific challenges, requiring insertion modifications, and IR-maintenance procedures to maintain function.     

Cost-Effectiveness of a Guided Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Placement System: A Single-Center Cohort Study

PurposeTo assess the cost-effectiveness of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placements using an ultrasound and electrocardiogram-guided system versus external measurements and confirmatory chest X-rays (CXRs).Materials and MethodsSixty-eight guided PICC placements were performed in 63 outpatients (mean age, 43 ± 13 years; 50% male) and compared to 68 propensity score-matched PICC placements (mean age, 44 ± 13 years; 56% male) performed using external measurements by the same operators. Post-placement CXRs were used to confirm final catheter tip positioning. Cohorts were compared in terms of repositioning rates, desired tip positioning rates (in the lower third of the superior vena cava or at the cavoatrial junction), and estimated cost per PICC positioned as desired using manufacturer quotes, Medicare reimbursement rates, and hourly wages for staff time. Agreement between tip positioning according to the guided system versus CXR was also assessed.ResultsGuided PICC placements required less repositioning (1.5% vs 10.3%, P = .03) and resulted in more catheters positioned as desired (86.8% vs 67.6%, P = .01) than the external measurement approach. The cost per PICC positioned as desired was lower for guided placements ($318.54 vs $381.44), suggesting that the guided system was cost-effective in this clinical setting. Guided system-CXR agreement for tip position was poor (κ=0.25, P = .002) due to tips being slightly farther from the cavoatrial junction on CXR than indicated by the guided system.ConclusionsThe guided PICC placement system was cost-effective in outpatients treated by a single division of interventional radiology at an academic institution.     

Value Improvement by Assessing IR Care via Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing

PurposeTo evaluate time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) in interventional radiology for image-guided vascular malformation treatment as an example.Materials and MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed on consecutive vascular malformation treatment cycles [67 venous malformations (VMs) and 11 arteriovenous malformations (AVMs)] in a university hospital in 2018. All activities were integrated with a process map, and spent resources were assigned accordingly. TDABC uses 2 parameters: (i) practical capacity cost rate, calculated as 80% of theoretical capacity, and (ii) time consumption of each resource determined by interviews (23 items). Thereby, the total costs were calculated. Treatment cycles were modified according to identified resource waste and TDABC-guided negotiations with health insurance.ResultsTotal personnel time required was higher for AVM (1,191 min) than for VM (637 min) treatment. The interventional procedure comprised the major part (46%) of personnel time required in AVM, whereas it comprised 19% in VM treatment. Materials represented the major cost type in AVM (75%) and VM (45%) treatments. TDABC-based treatment process modification led to a decrease in personnel time need of 16% and 30% and a cost reduction of 5.5% and 15.7% for AVM and VM treatments, respectively. TDABC-guided cost reduction and TDABC-informed negotiations improved profit from ?56% to +40% and from +41% to +69% for AVM and VM treatments, respectively.ConclusionsTDABC facilitated the precise costing of interventional radiologic treatment cycles and optimized internal processes, cost reduction, and revenues. Hence, TDABC is a promising tool to determine the denominator of interventional radiology's value.     

Public Awareness of Interventional Radiology: Population-Based Analysis of the Current State of and Pathways for Improvement

PurposeTo evaluate the awareness of interventional radiology (IR) among the public and identify methods for improvement.Materials and MethodsParticipants (N = 1,000) were anonymously surveyed using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing platform about medical and IR-specific knowledge, preferred methods of acquisition of medical information, and suggestions for improving awareness of IR. The survey consisted of 69 questions, including both Likert Scale and free text questions.ResultsOf the participants, 92% preferred undergoing a minimally invasive procedure over surgery. However, 39.8% recognized IR as a medical specialty, and less than 50% of these participants correctly identified IR as procedurally oriented. Of those who discussed or underwent an IR procedure (n = 113), most were also offered to undergo the procedure performed by a surgeon (n = 66). Furthermore, 71% (n = 20) of those who underwent the procedure performed by a surgeon reported that lack of awareness of IR played a role in their decision. Almost half of the respondents (n = 458) were interested in learning more about IR, particularly the diseases treated and procedures performed (42% and 37%, respectively). Short (<10-minute) educational videos and increased patient education by primary care providers (PCPs) were among the most suggested ways to improve awareness. Regarding the ambiguity of the name “interventional radiology,” most respondents (n = 555) reported this to be true, and “minimally invasive radiologist” was the most preferred alternative (21.18%).ConclusionsLack of awareness of IR may underlie underutilization. When presented with the knowledge that IR improves patient outcomes, minimally invasive procedures by an interventional radiologist are more often desired by the public than surgical options. Educational videos and patient education by PCPs may increase awareness of IR.