Real-world outcomes comparison among adults with atrial fibrillation undergoing catheter ablation with a contact force porous tip catheter versus a second-generation cryoballoon catheter: a retrospective analysis of multihospital US database.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To compare real-world clinical and economic outcomes among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing cardiac ablation with the contact force-sensing porous tip THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH SF (STSF) catheter versus the Arctic Front Advance Cryoballoon (AFA-CB) catheter. DESIGN:Retrospective, observational cohort study. SETTING:Premier Healthcare Database (PHD), between 1 September 2016 and 30 June 2018. PARTICIPANTS:Patients with AF (?18 years) were included if they had an index ablation procedure performed using the STSF catheter or AFA-CB catheter at a US hospital that consistently provided inpatient and outpatient data to PHD in the 12-month preindex period. Using 1:1 propensity score matching, patient groups were matched on study covariates. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Cost, length of stay (LOS), readmissions, direct current cardioversion (DCCV) and reablation outcomes were compared between matched cohorts of STSF and AFA-CB patients. RESULTS:A total of 3015 patients with AF met the study criteria, of which 1720 had ablation using the STSF catheter and 1295 had ablation using the AFA-CB catheter. In the propensity-matched sample, patients receiving ablation with the STSF catheter had ~17% lower total costs (US$23 096 vs US$27 682, p?0.0001) and ~27% lower supply costs (US$10 208 vs US$13 816, p?0.0001) versus patients receiving ablation with the AFA-CB catheter. A significantly lower likelihood of 4-month to 6-month cardiovascular-related readmission (OR 0.460, 95% CI 0.220 to 0.959) was associated with the STSF catheter versus the AFA-CB catheter. No significant differences in LOS, room and board cost, 4-month to 6-month all-cause and AF-related readmissions, DCCV and reablation were observed among technologies. Sensitivity analysis restricting patient sample by provider ablation volume demonstrated similar results. CONCLUSION:Lower index ablation total and supply costs were observed among patients with AF undergoing cardiac catheter ablation using the STSF catheter versus the AFA-CB catheter.
SUBMITTER: Costea A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7409957 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
ACCESS DATA