Costs, efficiency, and patient-reported outcomes associated with suture-mediated percutaneous closure for atrial fibrillation ablation: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial

To evaluate the cost and efficiency of suture-mediated percutaneous closure (SMC) compared to manual compression (MC) after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. SMC has been demonstrated to be efficacious in reducing hemostasis and bedrest times after AF ablation. To date, randomized data comparing th...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
Main Authors:	Kiani, Soroosh, Eggebeen, Joel, Al-Gibbawi, Mounir, Smith, Paige, Preiser, Thomas, Kundu, Suprateek, Zheng, Ziduo, Bhatia, Neal K, Shah, Anand D, Westerman, Stacy B, De Lurgio, David B, Tompkins, Christine M, Patel, Anshul M, El-Chami, Mikhael F, Merchant, Faisal M, Lloyd, Michael S
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	United States 08-10-2024
Subjects:	percutaneous closure atrial fibrillation ablation early discharge ambulation proglide hemostasis prostyle perclose vascular closure same day discharge suture mediate closure
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	To evaluate the cost and efficiency of suture-mediated percutaneous closure (SMC) compared to manual compression (MC) after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. SMC has been demonstrated to be efficacious in reducing hemostasis and bedrest times after AF ablation. To date, randomized data comparing the direct and indirect cost between the two techniques have not been described. We conducted a 1:1 randomized trial comparing SMC to MC following AF ablation. The primary endpoints have been previously published. However, secondary endpoints pertinent to indirect cost including complication rates, hospital utilization (i.e., delays in discharge, additional patient encounters, nursing utilization), pain, patient reported outcomes, as well as the direct costs of care associated with AF ablation were collected. We also performed secondary analysis of the primary endpoint to evaluate for a learning curve, and subgroups analysis comparing efficacy across different numbers of access sites and compared to those in the MC group with a figure-of-eight suture (Fo8), that could potentially have impacted the relative efficiency of the procedure. A total of 107 patients were randomized and included: 53 in the SMC group and 54 in MC. A learning curve was observed in the SMC group between the first and second half of the study group (p = 0.037), with no such difference in the MC group. After accounting for the number of access sites, time to hemostasis remained shorter in the SMC Group (p = 0.002). Compared to those in the Fo8 arm (n = 37), the time to hemostasis remained shorter in the SMC group (p = 0.001). Among those planned for same-day discharge, there were more delays in the MC group (31.5% vs. 11.3%, p = 0.0144). Rates of major and minor complications were similar between SMC and MC groups at discharge (p = 0.243) and 30 days (p = 1.00), as were nursing utilization, self-reported pain, and overall patient reported outcomes. The overall cost of care related to the procedure was similar between the MC and SMC groups ($56 533.65 [$45 699.47, $66 987.64] vs. $57 050.44 [$47 251.40, $66 426.34], p = 0.601). SMC has been shown to decrease time to hemostasis and ambulation and facilitate earlier same-day discharge after AF ablation without an increase in direct or indirect costs.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	1045-3873 1540-8167 1540-8167
DOI:	10.1111/jce.16440