paracentesis and mortality in u.s. hospitals josé l. gonzález, md wednesday, june 25 th,...
TRANSCRIPT
Paracentesis and Mortality in U.S. HospitalsJosé L. González, MD
Wednesday, June 25th, 2014Journal Club
Reasons for this Study:
ASLD recommends
Quality indicator
Data linking paracentesis and outcomes is lacking
Epidemiology
Paracentesis is performed about 60% of the time
Occurs in 25% of patients w/ clinically significant ascites
SBP is fatal in 30% of patients
Methods:
Data Source: 2009 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS)
Data stratified by: size ownership teaching status location
Sample:
>18 years of age
Excluded transfers from OSH
ICD-9 Codes: Ascites SBP HES (if ascites is a secondary dx)
*All of the above pts had to have a 2º dx of cirrhosis
+/- Paracentesis procedure code
Variables considered:
Early vs Delayed :: <1 day vs >1day
Age
Sex
Race / Ethnicity
Weekday vs weekend
Insurance provider
Income
Comorbidities
Statistics:
Categorical variables: Pearson X2
Continuous variables: Student t test
Re-examination of stats after excluding those who died on the day of admission
Results
40 million DCs in 2009
17,741 met inclusion criteria
10,743 paracentesis were performed (61%)
Diagnosis N paracentesis performed
HES 10,500
56%
Ascites 2,977
SBP 4,233 77%
Results:Para or no para
Increased likelihood to have had paracentesis Slightly younger Higher median income Dx of Sepsis & ARF Less likely to be in the South Teaching or urban hospital
56.4% in the South & 64.1% in the NE
Results:Para or no para
No difference: Sex, race, admitting circumstance, primary payer, # of
comorbidities, hospital size or ownership
Para independently associated w/ Self-pay ARF Teaching status of hospital
Less likely to be done on the weekends
Results:Primary Outcome
Those who received a para had a lower in-hosp mortality than those who did not (6.5% vs 8.5%, P = .03)
In-hosp mortality was lower in the Midwest
Those who died: Had more comorbidities More likely to have had sepsis More likely to have had RF
Results:Primary Outcome
Dx of HES or ascites:
(6.8% vs 9.1% adjusted OR) 0.54: 95% CI, 0.38-0.76
Dx of SBP
(5.8% vs 4.7% adjusted OR) 0.91: 95% CI, 0.38-2.19
Results:Primary Outcome
Delayed para <1 day vs >1 day
More likely to be Female be Admitted on weekend have Medicare Have more comorbidities To have ARF To be in a private, nonprofit hosp
And less likely to be in a teaching hospital
5.7% vs 8.1% p = 0.49, but not stat sig (0.78-2.02 CI)
Results:Secondary Outcome
Hospital Length of Stay and Hospital Charges
Para = 6.6 days, $44,586
No para = 5.3days, $ 31,746
Conclusions
Pts w/ cirrhosis and ascites, only 61% undergo para
Paracentesis in these patients is associated w/ improved mortality
Paracentesis in all pts studied is associated w/ increased LOS and hospital charges
Discussion
Only 61% of patients admitted for ascites or HES had a paracentesis
1996 survey data: IM graduating residents are comfortable w/ the procedure
Weekend admissions are associated w/ decrease para
Detail in NIS info doesn’t tell us why, potential reasons
Low index of suspicion for SBP Tx empirically
Discussion
Mechanism for beneficial effect? Probably due to increased detection and tx of SBP
Para 6.8%
HES or ascites
No Para 9.1%
Para 5.8%
SBP
No para 4.7%
DiscussionSecondary Outcomes
Unit of obs = each admission, so readmission can’t be assessed
LOS and $ were increased in paracentesis group Undiagnosed SBP cases may have been DCd b4
recognition? How much did increased mortality contribute to
decreased LOS/$?
Study Limitations
Administrative data reliant on coding Canadian study, > 80% sensitivity for patacentesis
Data don’t distinguish between diagnostic and therapeutic paras
Subclinical ascites?
Did severity of illness influence decision to perform paras?
Increased likelihood in sepsis and ARF Other studies show that worse liver dz is ass. w/
recommended ascites care
Association but not causality