Background Bleeding is a significant complication in cardiac surgery and is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This study evaluated the impact of bleeding on length of stay (LOS) and critical care utilization in a nationwide sample of cardiac surgery patients treated at English hospitals. Methods Retrospective, observational cohort study using linked English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) records for a nationwide sample of patients aged ≥18 years who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), valve repair/replacement, or aortic operations from January 2010 through February 2016. The primary independent variables were in-hospital bleeding complications and reoperation for bleeding before discharge. Generalized linear models were used to quantify the adjusted mean incremental difference [MID] in post-procedure LOS and critical care days associated with bleeding complications, independent of measured baseline characteristics. Results The study included 7774 cardiac surgery patients (3963 CABG; 2363 valve replacement/repair; 160 aortic procedures; 1288 multiple procedures, primarily CABG+valve). Mean LOS was 10.7d, including a mean of 4.2d in critical care. Incidences of in-hospital bleeding complications and reoperation for bleeding were 6.7 and 0.3%, respectively. Patients with bleeding had longer LOS (MID: 3.1d; p < 0.0001) and spent more days in critical care (MID: 2.4d; p < 0.0001). Reoperation for bleeding was associated with larger increases in LOS (MID = 4.0d; p = 0.002) and days in critical care (MID = 3.2d; p = 0.001). Conclusions Among English cardiac surgery patients, in-hospital bleeding complications were associated with substantial increases in healthcare utilization. Increased use of evidence-based strategies to prevent and manage bleeding may reduce the clinical and economic burden associated with bleeding complications in cardiac surgery. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13019-019-0881-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The burden of complications associated with peripheral intravenous use is underevaluated, in part, due to the broad use, inconsistent coding, and lack of mandatory reporting of these devices. This study aimed to analyze the clinical and economic impact of peripheral intravenous–related complications on hospitalized patients. This analysis of Premier Perspective® Database US hospital discharge records included admissions occurring between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2015 for pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, diabetes with complications, and major trauma (hip, spinal, cranial fractures). Admissions were assumed to include a peripheral intravenous. Admissions involving surgery, dialysis, or central venous lines were excluded. Multivariable analyses compared inpatient length of stay, cost, admission to intensive care unit, and discharge status of patients with versus without peripheral intravenous–related complications (bloodstream infection, cellulitis, thrombophlebitis, other infection, or extravasation). Models were conducted separately for congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes with complications, and overall (all 7 diagnoses) and adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics. We identified 588 375 qualifying admissions: mean (SD), age 66.1 (20.6) years; 52.4% female; and 95.2% urgent/emergent admissions. Overall, 1.76% of patients (n = 10 354) had peripheral intravenous–related complications. In adjusted analyses between patients with versus without peripheral intravenous complications, the mean (95% confidence interval) inpatient length of stay was 5.9 (5.8-6.0) days versus 3.9 (3.9-3.9) days; mean hospitalization cost was $10 895 ($10 738-$11 052) versus $7009 ($6988-$7031). Patients with complications were less likely to be discharged home versus those without (62.4% [58.6%-66.1%] vs 77.6% [74.6%-80.5%]) and were more likely to have died (3.6% [2.9%-4.2%] vs 0.7% [0.6%-0.9%]). Models restricted to single admitting diagnosis were consistent with overall results. Patients with peripheral intravenous–related complications have longer length of stay, higher costs, and greater risk of death than patients without such complications; this is true across diagnosis groups of interest. Future research should focus on reducing these complications to improve clinical and economic outcomes.

Aims:The electrosurgical technology category is used widely, with a diverse spectrum of devices designed for different surgical needs. Historically, hospitals are supplied with electrosurgical devices from several manufacturers, and those devices are often evaluated separately; it may be more efficient to evaluate the category holistically. This study assessed the health economic impact of adopting an electrosurgical device-category from a single manufacturer. Methods: A budget impact model was developed from a U.S. hospital perspective. The uptake of electrosurgical devices from EES (Ethicon Electrosurgery), including ultrasonic, advanced bipolar, smoke evacuators, and reusable dispersive electrodes were compared with similar MED (Medical Energy Devices) from multiple manufacturers. It was assumed that an average hospital performed 10,000 annual procedures 80% of which involved electrosurgery. Current utilization assumed 100% MED use, including advanced energy, conventional smoke mitigation options (e.g. ventilation, masks), and single-use disposable dispersive electrode devices. Future utilization assumed 100% EES use, including advanced energy devices, smoke evacuators (i.e. 80% uptake), and reusable dispersive electrodes. Surgical specialties included colorectal, bariatric, gynecology, thoracic and general surgery. Systematic reviews, network meta-analyses, and meta-regressions informed operating room (OR) time, hospital stay, and transfusion model inputs. Costs were assigned to model parameters, and price parity was assumed for advanced energy devices. The costs of disposables for dispersive electrodes and smokeevacuators were included. Results: The base-case analysis, which assessed the adoption of EES instead of MED for an average U.S. hospital predicted an annual savings of $824,760 ($101 per procedure). Savings were attributable to associated reductions with EES in OR time, days of hospital stay, and volume of disposable electrodes. Sensitivity analyses were consistent with these base-case findings. Conclusions: Category-wide adoption of electrosurgical devices from a single manufacturer demonstrated economic advantages compared with disaggregated product uptake. Future research should focus on informing comparisons of innovative electrosurgical devices.

BackgroundDespite hemostat use, uncontrolled surgical bleeding is prevalent. Drawbacks of current hemostats include limitations with efficacy on first attempt and suboptimal ease-of-use. Evarrest® is a novel fibrin sealant patch that has demonstrated high hemostatic efficacy compared with standard of care across bleeding severities. The objective of this study was to conduct a hospital cost analysis of the fibrin sealant patch versus standard of care in soft tissue and hepatic surgical bleeding.MethodsThe analysis quantified the 30-day costs of each comparator from a hospital perspective. Published US unit costs were applied to resource use (ie, initial treatment, retreatment, operating time, hospitalization, transfusion, and ventilator) reported in four trials. A “surgical” analysis included resources clinically related to the hemostatic benefit of the fibrin sealant patch, whereas a “hospital” analysis included all resources reported in the trials. An exploratory subgroup analysis focused solely on coagulopathic patients defined by abnormal blood test results.ResultsThe surgical analysis predicted cost savings of $54 per patient with the fibrin sealant patch compared with standard of care (net cost impact: −$54 per patient; sensitivity range: −$1,320 to $1,213). The hospital analysis predicted further cost savings with the fibrin sealant patch (net cost impact of −$2,846 per patient; sensitivity range: −$1,483 to −$5,575). Subgroup analyses suggest that the fibrin sealant patch may provide dramatic cost savings in the coagulopathic subgroup of $3,233 (surgical) and $9,287 (hospital) per patient. Results were most sensitive to operating time and product units.ConclusionIn soft tissue and hepatic problematic surgical bleeding, the fibrin sealant patch may result in important hospital cost savings.

No abstract

Background: Monopolar electrosurgery, one of the most widely used techniques in surgery, requires two electrodes: a working electrode and a return electrode. Commonly, adhesive or "sticky" pads that attach directly to the patient are used as return electrodes. Acting as electrolytic conductors, adhesive pads are highly effective, but require some effort to apply and remove, and if improperly placed or partially detached may lead to high electrical current density and the potential for pad site burns. Alternatively, a capacitive return electrode, such as the Mega Soft pad, may be used that works on the same principle as a two-plate capacitor. Objective: This article details the technology underlying capacitive electrodes, reviews the scientific literature to-date, and provides recommendations on how to best use the Mega Soft pad. Results: No direct contact is required between the pad and patient, and the return electrode is designed so that current density is limited regardless of pad placement, reducing the risk of pad site burn. Although the technology is now mature, having been in the field for over 20 years, best practices for optimal performance from capacitive return electrodes are still not widespread, and misunderstandings persist regarding use of capacitive electrodes with contact monitoring systems and implantable electronic devices. Conclusion: With proper training, capacitive return electrodes may be substituted for conventional adhesive pads with the benefits of easier application and reduced risk of pad site burns.

Aim: To assess the clinical and economic impact of flowable gelatin hemostatic matrix (FGHM) in anterior cervical spine surgery (ACSS). Patients & methods: A total of 451 patients with performed ACSS were included to compare FGHM with conventional hemostatic methods for clinical and cost outcomes using propensity score matching method. Results: The comparisons of the matched 125 pairs observed that FGHM was associated with significantly lower blood transfusion volume (11.2 vs 36.3 ml; p = 0.039), shorter postsurgery hospital stay length (3.7 vs 4.7 days; p = 0.002), shorter operation time (103.5 vs 117.7 min; p = 0.004), lower drainage placement rate (51.2 vs 89.6%; p < 0.001) and also lower total hospital costs (median ¥64,717 vs ¥65,064; p = 0.035). Conclusion: Use of FGHM in ACSS improved perioperative outcomes without increasing hospital costs.

Hemostasis products, such as SURGICEL®, have been increasingly used across a wide variety of surgical procedures to mitigate bleeding-related risks and complications. This retrospective observational study described the utilization pattern of the SURGICEL® family of oxidized regenerated cellulose products (SURGICEL® ORIGINAL, SURGICEL® FIBRILLAR™, SURGICEL SNoW®) in a large, vertically integrated healthcare system, by utilizing electronic medical records (EMR) extracted from August 2013 through June 2015 at Henry Ford Health System (HFHS). Descriptive measurements were compared between SURGICEL® ORIGINAL and advanced SURGICEL® products (SURGICEL® FIBRILLAR™ and SURGICEL SNoW®) for pooled common surgical procedures. Among 1471 patients, 450 received SURGICEL® ORIGINAL, and 1021 received advanced SURGICEL® products. A significantly greater proportion of patients given advanced SURGICEL® products had comorbidities (91.0% vs 85.6%, p=.0024), prior bleeding conditions (49.9% vs 30.9%, p&lt;.0001), and prior use of anticoagulants (27.7% vs 5.3%, p&lt;.0001). Advanced SURGICEL® products were more likely to be used in coronary artery bypass grafting (13.7% vs 1.6%, p&lt;.0001). Among a sub-set of 1420 patients with complete package size information (988 Advanced and 432 ORIGINAL), significantly fewer mean normalized units of Advanced SURGICEL® were used per patient case (3.9 vs 5.5, p&lt;.0001). Despite Advanced SURGICEL® products being utilized in higher risk bleeding situations compared to cases where SURGICEL® ORIGINAL was utilized, fewer overall normalized units of Advanced SURGICEL® were required per patient case. Further research is needed to investigate the implications of topical hemostat use in continuous oozing bleeding situations on outcomes, hospital costs, and resources.