Skip to main content
Search
Search
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
Free access
Research Article
7 October 2019

Twelve-month healthcare utilization and expenditures in Medicare fee-for-service patients with clinically significant mitral regurgitation

Authors: Hirsch S Mehta, Joanna Van Houten [email protected], Patrick Verta, Candace Gunnarsson, Sarah Mollenkopf, and David P CorkAuthor Info & Affiliations
Volume 8, Number 13
https://doi.org/10.2217/cer-2019-0026
PDFFormats

Abstract

Aim: This study sought to quantify the healthcare burden of Medicare patients with clinically significant mitral regurgitation (sMR). Materials & methods: Proxy definitions were used for sMR, including MR surgery, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension or >2 echocardiograms. Results: In this study, 11,173 patients had significant degenerative MR (sDMR); 25,402 had significant functional MR (sFMR); and 12,232 had significant uncharacterized MR (sUMR). Patients with sFMR (18,880) were more likely to be hospitalized and present to the emergency department compared with patients with sDMR (9,795) or sUMR (10,587). Annual healthcare expenditures for sMR patients were: US$29,328 for sFMR; US$17,112 for sUMR; and US$12,870 for sDMR. Conclusion: Novel therapeutic interventions merit further evaluation to reduce the substantial healthcare burden of sMR in the Medicare population.

Supplementary Material

File (suppl_file.zip)
File (supplementary figure 1.docx)
File (supplementary table 1.docx)

References

1.
Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO et al. 2017 AHA/ACC focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on clinical practice guidelines. Circulation 135(25), e1159–e1195 (2017).
PubMed
Google Scholar
2.
Benjamin EJ, Blaha MJ, Chiuve SE et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2017 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 135(10), e146–e603 (2017).
PubMed
Google Scholar
3.
Nkomo VT, Gardin JM, Skelton TN et al. Burden of valvular heart diseases: a population-based study. Lancet 368(9540), 1005–1011 (2006).
PubMed
Google Scholar
4.
Enriquez-Sarano M, Akins CW, Vahanian A. Mitral regurgitation. Lancet 373(9672), 1382–1394 (2009).
PubMed
Google Scholar
5.
Helms AS, Bach DS. Heart valve disease. Prim. Care 40(1), 91–108 (2013).
PubMed
Google Scholar
6.
Bach DS, Awais M, Gurm HS et al. Failure of guideline adherence for intervention in patients with severe mitral regurgitation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 54(9), 860–865 (2009).
PubMed
Google Scholar
7.
Carabello BA. The current therapy for mitral regurgitation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52(5), 319–326 (2008).
PubMed
Google Scholar
8.
Asgar AW, Mack MJ, Stone GW. Secondary mitral regurgitation in heart failure: pathophysiology, prognosis, and therapeutic considerations. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 65(12), 1231–1248 (2015).
PubMed
Google Scholar
9.
Hussaini A, Kar S. Percutaneous mitral valve repair: potential in heart failure management. Curr. Heart Fail. Rep. 7(1), 22–26 (2010).
PubMed
Google Scholar
10.
de Marchena E, Badiye A, Robalino G et al. Respective prevalence of the different carpentier classes of mitral regurgitation: a stepping stone for future therapeutic research and development. J. Card. Surg. 26(4), 385–392 (2011).
PubMed
Google Scholar
11.
Ahmed MI, McGiffin DC, O'Rourke RA et al. Mitral regurgitation. Curr. Probl. Cardiol. 34(3), 93–136 (2009).
PubMed
Google Scholar
12.
Moore M, Chen J, Mallow PJ et al. The direct health-care burden of valvular heart disease: evidence from US national survey data. Clinicoecon. Outcomes Res. 8, 613–627 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
13.
National Center for Health Statistics (US). Health, United States, 2015: With Special Feature on Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities. Hyattsville, MD, USA (2016).
Google Scholar
14.
McCullough PA, Philbin EF, Spertus JA et al. Confirmation of a heart failure epidemic: findings from the Resource Utilization Among Congestive Heart Failure (REACH) study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 39(1), 60–69 (2002).
PubMed
Google Scholar
15.
Adams DH, Rosenhek R, Falk V. Degenerative mitral valve regurgitation: best practice revolution. Eur. Heart J. 31(16), 1958–1966 (2010).
PubMed
Google Scholar
16.
Dziadzko V, Clavel MA, Dziadzko M et al. Outcome and undertreatment of mitral regurgitation: a community cohort study. Lancet 391(10124), 960–969 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
17.
Goel SS, Bajaj N, Aggarwal B et al. Prevalence and outcomes of unoperated patients with severe symptomatic mitral regurgitation and heart failure: comprehensive analysis to determine the potential role of MitraClip for this unmet need. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 63(2), 185–186 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
18.
Welp H, Martens S. Minimally invasive mitral valve repair. Curr. Opin. Anaesthesiol. 27(1), 65–71 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
19.
Downs EA, Johnston LE, LaPar DJ et al. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery provides excellent outcomes without increased cost: a multi-institutional analysis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 102(1), 14–21 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
20.
Stone GW, Lindenfeld J, Abraham WT et al. Transcatheter mitral-valve repair in patients with heart failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 379(24), 2307–2318 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
21.
Vemulapalli S, Lippmann SJ, Krucoff M et al. Cardiovascular events and hospital resource utilization pre- and post-transcatheter mitral valve repair in high-surgical risk patients. Am. Heart J. 189, 146–157 (2017).
PubMed
Google Scholar
22.
Iung B, Baron G, Butchart EG et al. A prospective survey of patients with valvular heart disease in Europe: the Euro Heart Survey on valvular heart disease. Eur. Heart J. 24(13), 1231–1243 (2003).
PubMed
Google Scholar
|