Objective. To examine potential sources of errors at each step of the described inpatient International Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding process. Data Sources/Study Setting. The use of disease codes from the ICD has expanded from classifying morbidity and mortality information for statistical purposes to diverse sets of applications in research, health care policy, and health care finance. By describing a brief history of ICD coding, detailing the process for assigning codes, identifying where errors can be introduced into the process, and reviewing methods for examining code accuracy, we help code users more systematically evaluate code accuracy for their particular applications. Study Design/Methods. We summarize the inpatient ICD diagnostic coding process from patient admission to diagnostic code assignment. We examine potential sources of errors at each step and offer code users a tool for systematically evaluating code accuracy. Principle Findings. Main error sources along the ''patient trajectory'' include amount and quality of information at admission, communication among patients and providers, the clinician's knowledge and experience with the illness, and the clinician's attention to detail. Main error sources along the ''paper trail'' include variance in the electronic and written records, coder training and experience, facility quality-control efforts, and unintentional and intentional coder errors, such as misspecification, unbundling, and upcoding. Conclusions. By clearly specifying the code assignment process and heightening their awareness of potential error sources, code users can better evaluate the applicability and limitations of codes for their particular situations. ICD codes can then be used in the most appropriate ways.
Repairing thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms poses substantial risks, particularly when the entire thoracoabdominal aorta (extent II) is replaced. Nonetheless, our data suggest that thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair, when performed at an experienced center, can produce respectable outcomes.
Objective: The frozen elephant trunk technique's safety regarding spinal cord ischemia has been questioned. We used a meta-analysis to determine the rates of adverse neurologic events and mortality.
Methods:We searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases (inception to April 2018) to identify studies of neurologic events after the frozen elephant trunk procedure. Separate meta-analyses were conducted with random-effects models to assess frozen elephant trunk associations with spinal cord ischemia, stroke, operative mortality, and all adverse events combined. Subgroup analyses compared outcomes in patients with acute versus nonacute type A dissection and aneurysm and with different extents of coverage.Results: Thirty-five studies (total N ¼ 3154) met inclusion criteria. The pooled rates of the outcomes of interest were 4.7% (95% confidence interval, 3.5-6.2) for spinal cord ischemia, 7.6% (95% confidence interval, 5.0-11.5) for stroke, and 8.8% (95% confidence interval, 7.0-10.9) for operative mortality. The spinal cord ischemia event rate was higher with stent length 15 cm or greater or coverage to T8 or beyond than with stent length of 10 cm (11.6% vs 2.5%, P<.001). Adverse event rates in patients with acute type A aortic dissection versus nonacute dissection or aneurysm were as follows: mortality 9.2% versus 7.6% (P ¼ .46), stroke 9.3% versus 6.6% (P ¼ .51), and overall adverse events 22.0% versus 16.5% (P ¼ .41).
Conclusions:As the frozen elephant trunk procedure becomes more popular, accurate data regarding outcomes are vital. We associated the frozen elephant trunk technique with (nonsignificantly) more adverse events overall in acute type A dissection cases. Stent length of 10 cm was associated with significantly less risk of spinal cord ischemia. Using a stent 15 cm or greater or coverage extending to T8 or farther should be avoided. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020;160:20-33) 35 Studies 3154 Patients 4.7% SCI 7.6% Stroke 8.8% Mortality Extent of SC Coverage Dissection (Type A or DeBakey Type I) / Aneurysm, Nondissection Overall Adverse Event (Mortality / Stroke / SCI) ≥ 15 cm stent length / Coverage at or distal to T8 (6 studies / 201 patients)From the
Among contemporary cases, both traditional and hybrid total aortic arch replacement had acceptable results. Comparing these 2 different surgical treatment options is challenging, and an individualized approach offers the best results. Permanent adverse outcome was not significantly different between the 2 groups. Procedure type is not an independent predictor of permanent stroke. Prior cardiac disease, past or current smoking, and congestive heart failure predict adverse outcomes for total aortic arch replacement.
Moderate hypothermia with ACP is associated with lower in-hospital and 30-day mortality, shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time, and fewer neurologic sequelae than deep hypothermia in patients who undergo aortic arch surgery with ACP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.