Review of Efforts to Decrease Costly Leg Wound Complications in the Medicare Population Following Coronary Revascularization
Background: Current trends show that patients referred for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are significantly older, sicker, and at higher risk for complications than ever before. Eliminating leg wound complications would significantly benefit these patients and reduce the consumption of health care time and dollars. Endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) decreases the risk of wound complications in patients following CABG and may decrease costly long-term wound-related problems.
Methods: In this retrospective study, the cases of 1909 Medicare patients who had undergone EVH or open vein harvesting (OVH) for CABG were reviewed. The risk factors of these patients were examined and compared with those of 1485 non-Medicare patients. Readmissions, home health care costs, and office lengths of service were reviewed and analyzed.
Results: The results of univariate analyses of the Medicare versus non-Medicare populations indicated significant differences for peripheral vascular disease (25.4% versus 17.2%; P < .0001), renal failure (6.0% versus 2.8%; P < .0001), hypertension (75.4% versus 71.5%; P = .011), female sex (31.1% versus 22.4%; P < .0001), mean age (69.8 years versus 57.1 years; P < .0001), and mortality risk (4.6% versus 2.2%; P < .0001). The wound rates in the Medicare group were 1.1% for EVH (n = 741) versus 2.8% for OVH (n = 1168), and this difference was significant (P = .0163) despite a higher frequency of morbid obesity in the EVH population (P < .0001). No significant differences were found in readmission frequency, home health care costs, or office length of service.
Conclusion: EVH benefits Medicare patients. Although this study is the largest to date to use disposable instruments, there is a lack of statistical power in the analysis of cost comparisons due to the small sample size of wound complications. However, there appears to be a general trend toward a lower treatment cost per patient and less resource use with EVH.
December 2000.nAllen KB, Griffith GL, Heimansohn DA, et al. 1998. Endoscopic versus traditional saphenous vein harvesting: a prospective randomized trial.Ann Thorac Surg 66:26-32.nAllen KB, Heimansohn DA, Robinson RJ, et al. 2000. Risk factors for leg wound complications following endoscopic versus traditional saphenous vein harvesting. Heart Surg Forum 3:325-30.nAlrawi SJ, Raju R, Satheesan R, Cunningham JN, Acinapaura AJ. 2001. Interleukin-1, interleukin-2, and interleukin-10 expression in different techniques of saphenous vein harvesting. Heart Surg Forum 4:47-52.nBoyce JM, Potter-Bynoe G, Dziobek L. 1990. Hospital reimbursement patterns among patients with surgical wound infections following open heart surgery. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 11:89-93.nBrandt CP, Greene GC, Hall WC, Pollard TR. 2002. Endoscopic vein harvesting: benefits continue to increase as techniques are learned and technology advances. Surg Physician Assistant 8:21-6.nCarpino PA, Khabbaz KR, Bojar RM, et al. 2000. Clinical benefits of endoscopic vein harvesting in patients with risk factors for saphenectomy wound infections undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 119:69-75.nFerguson TB Jr, Hammill BG, Peterson ED, DeLong ER, Grover FL. 2002. A decade of change: risk profiles and outcomes for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting procedures, 1990-1999: a report from the STS National Database Committee and the Duke Clinical Research Institute: Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Ann Thorac Surg 73:480-90.nGandhi RH, Katz D, Wheeler JR, et al. 1994. Vein harvest ischemia: a peripheral vascular complication of coronary artery bypass grafting. Cardiovasc Surg 2:478-83.nGoldsborough MA, Miller MH, Gibson J, et al. 1999. Prevalence of leg wound complications after coronary artery bypass grafting: determination of risk factors. Am J Crit Care 8:149-53.nIhaka R, Gentleman R. 1996. R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J Comput Graph Stat 5:299-314.nKiaii B, Moon BC, Massel D, et al. 2002. A prospective randomized trial of endoscopic versus conventional harvesting of the saphenousnvein in coronary artery bypass surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 123: 204-12.nLancey RA, Cuenoud H, Nunnari JJ. 2001. Scanning electron microscopic analysis of endoscopic versus open vein harvesting techniques. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 42:297-301.nLyznicki JM, Young DC, Riggs JA, Davis RM. 2001. Obesity: assessment and management in primary care. Am Fam Physician 63:2185-96.nMakary M. 2000. Minimally invasive vein and artery harvesting. Presented at: Cardiovascular Roundtable, The Advisory Board Company;nMarty B, von Segesser LK, Tozzi P, et al. 2000. Benefits of endoscopic vein harvesting. World J Surg 24:1104-8.nMeyer DM, Rogers TE, Jessen ME, Estrera AS, Chin YK. 2000. Histologic evidence of the safety of endoscopic saphenous vein graft preparation. Ann Thorac Surg 70:487-91.nMorris RJ, Butler MT, Samuels LE. 1998. Minimally invasive saphenous vein harvesting. Ann Thorac Surg 66:1026-8.nPaletta CE, Huang DB, Fiore AC, Swartz MT, Rilloraza FL, Gardner JE. 2000. Major leg wound complications after saphenous vein harvest for coronary revascularization. Ann Thorac Surg 70:492-7.nPatel AN, Hebeler RF, Hamman BL, et al. 2001. Prospective analysis of endoscopic vein harvesting. Am J Surg 182:716-9.nThomas TA, Taylor SM, Crane MM, et al. 1999. An analysis of limb-threatening lower extremity wound complications after 1090 consecutive coronary artery bypass procedures. Vasc Med 4:83-8.n
How to Cite
Author Disclosure & Copyright Transfer Agreement
In order to publish the original work of another person(s), The Heart Surgery Forum® must receive an acknowledgment of the Author Agreement and Copyright Transfer Statement transferring to Forum Multimedia Publishing, L.L.C., a subsidiary of Carden Jennings Publishing Co., Ltd. the exclusive rights to print and distribute the author(s) work in all media forms. Failure to check Copyright Transfer agreement box below will delay publication of the manuscript.
A current form follows:
The author(s) hereby transfer(s), assign(s), or otherwise convey(s) all copyright ownership of the manuscript submitted to Forum Multimedia Publishing, LLC (Publisher). The copyright transfer covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the article and the material contained therein throughout the world in all languages and in all media of expression now known or later developed, including but not limited to reprints, photographic reproduction, microfilm, electronic data processing (including programming, storage, and transmission to other electronic data record(s), or any other reproductions of similar nature), and translations.
However, Publisher grants back to the author(s) the following:
- The right to make and distribute copies of all or part of this work for use of the author(s) in teaching;
- The right to use, after publication in The Heart Surgery Forum, all or part of the material from this work in a book by the author(s), or in a collection of work by the author(s);
- The royalty-free right to make copies of this work for internal distribution within the institution/company that employs the author(s) subject to the provisions below for a work-made-for-hire;
- The right to use figures and tables from this work, and up to 250 words of text, for any purpose;
- The right to make oral presentations of material from this work.
Publisher reserves the right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. To republish, such third parties must obtain written permission from the Publisher. (This is in accordance with the Copyright Statute, United States Code, Title 17. Exception: If all authors were bona fide officers or employees of the U.S. Government at the time the paper was prepared, the work is a “work of the US Government” (prepared by an officer or employee of the US Government as part of official duties), and therefore is not subject to US copyright; such exception should be indicated on signature lines. If this work was prepared under US Government contract or grant, the US Government may reproduce, royalty-free, all or portions of this work and may authorize others to do so, for official US Government purposes only, if the US Government contract or grant so requires.
I have participated in the conception and design of this work and in the writing of the manuscript and take public responsibility for it. Neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under my authorship has been published, has been submitted for publication elsewhere, or will be submitted for publication elsewhere while under consideration by The Heart Surgery Forum, except as described in an attachment. I have reviewed this manuscript (original version) and approve its submission. If I am listed above as corresponding author, I will provide all authors with information regarding this manuscript and will obtain their approval before submitting any revision. I attest to the validity, accuracy, and legitimacy of the content of the manuscript and understand that Publisher assumes no responsibility for the validity, accuracy, and legitimacy of its content. I warrant that this manuscript is original with me and that I have full power to make this Agreement. I warrant that it contains no matter that is libelous or otherwise unlawful or that invades individual privacy or infringes any copyright or other proprietary right. I agree to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless of and from any claim made against Publisher that relates to or arises out of the publication of the manuscript and agree that this indemnification shall include payment of all costs and expenses relating to the defense of any such claim, including all reasonable attorney’s fees.
I warrant that I have no financial interest in the drugs, devices, or procedures described in the manuscript (except as disclosed in the attached statement).
I state that the institutional Human Subjects Committee and/or the Ethics Committee approved the clinical protocol reported in this manuscript for the use of experimental techniques, drugs, or devices in human subjects and appropriate informed consent documents were utilized.
Furthermore, I state that any and all animals used for experimental purposes received humane care in USDA registered facilities in compliance with the “Principles of Laboratory Animal Care” formulated by the National Society for Medical Research and the “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” prepared by the Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources and published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH Publication No. 85-23, revised 1985).