Search

Objectives: The aims of this study were to compare the outcomes of patients primarily admitted for ischemic stroke with and without a secondary diagnosis of RA., Methods: Data were abstracted from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2016 and 2017 database. The NIS was searched for hospitalizations for adult patients with ischemic stroke as principal diagnosis with and without RA as secondary diagnosis using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. Hospital length of stay (LOS), total hospital charges, odds of receiving tissue plasminogen activator, and mechanical thrombectomy were secondary outcomes of interest. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analyses were used accordingly to adjust for confounders., Results: There were more than 71 million discharges included in the combined 2016 and 2017 NIS database. Of 525,570 patients with ischemic stroke, 8670 (1.7%) had RA. Hospitalizations for ischemic stroke with RA had less inpatient mortality (4.7% vs. 5.5%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.85; p = 0.001), shorter LOS (5.1 vs 5.7 days, p < 0.0001), lower mean total hospital charges ($61,626 vs. $70,345, p < 0.0001), and less odds of undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (3.9% vs. 5.1%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.72; p < 0.0001) compared with those without RA., Conclusions: Hospitalizations for ischemic stroke with RA had less inpatient mortality, shorter LOS, lower total hospital charges, and less likelihood of undergoing mechanical thrombectomy compared with those without RA. However, the odds of receiving tissue plasminogen activator were similar between both groups. Further studies to understand its mechanism would be helpful., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients primarily admitted for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with and without systemic sclerosis (SSc). The primary outcome was odds of inpatient mortality. Hospital length of stay, total hospital charges, rates of cardiovascular procedures, and treatments were secondary outcomes of interest., Methods: Data were abstracted from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2016 and 2017 Database. The NIS was searched for hospitalizations for adult patients with ACS (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI], non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI], and unstable angina) as principal diagnosis with and without SSc as secondary diagnosis using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis was used accordingly to adjust for confounders., Results: There were more than 71 million discharges included in the combined 2016 and 2017 NIS database. There were 1,319,464 hospitalizations for adult patients with a principal International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code for ACS. There were 1155 (0.09%) of these hospitalizations that had SSc. The adjusted odds ratios for inpatient mortality for ACS, STEMI, and NSTEMI hospitalizations with coexisting SSc compared with those without SSc were 2.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-3.43; p = 0.009), 2.47 (95% CI, 1.05-5.79; p = 0.038), and 2.19 (95% CI, 1.14-4.23; p = 0.019), respectively., Conclusions: Acute coronary syndrome hospitalizations with SSc have increased inpatient mortality compared with those without SSc. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and NSTEMI hospitalizations with SSc have increased inpatient mortality compared with STEMI and NSTEMI hospitalizations without SSc, respectively. Acute coronary syndrome hospitalizations with SSc have similar hospital length of stay, total hospital charges, rates of revascularization strategies (percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass surgery, and thrombolytics), and other interventions (such as percutaneous external assist device and intra-aortic balloon pump) compared with those without SSc., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients primarily admitted for atrial fibrillation (AFib) with and without a secondary diagnosis of systemic sclerosis (SSc). The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. Hospital length of stay (LOS), total hospital charges, odds of undergoing ablation, and electrical cardioversion were secondary outcomes of interest., Methods: Data were abstracted from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2016 and 2017 Database. The NIS was searched for adult hospitalizations with AFib as principal diagnosis with and without SSc as secondary diagnosis using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis was used accordingly to adjust for confounders., Results: There were over 71 million discharges included in the combined 2016 and 2017 NIS database. Of 821,630 AFib hospitalizations, 750 (0.09%) had SSc. The adjusted odds ratio for inpatient mortality for AFib with coexisting SSc compared with without coexisting SSc was 3.3 (95% confidence interval, 1.27-8.52; p = 0.014). Atrial fibrillation with coexisting SSc hospitalizations had similar LOS (4.2 vs 3.4 days; p = 0.767), mean total hospital charges ($40,809 vs $39,158; p = 0.266), odds of undergoing ablation (2.7% vs 4.2%; p = 0.461), and electrical cardioversion (12.0% vs 17.5%; p = 0.316) compared with without coexisting SSc., Conclusions: Patients admitted primarily for AFib with a secondary diagnosis of SSc have more than 3 times the odds of inpatient death compared with those without coexisting SSc. Hospital LOS, total hospital charges, likelihood of undergoing ablation, and electrical cardioversion were similar in both groups., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

This study compares the odds of being admitted for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in patients with psoriasis compared with those without psoriasis alone. We also compared hospital outcomes of patients admitted primarily for IBD with and without a secondary diagnosis of psoriasis. Data were abstracted from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2016 and 2017 database to search for hospitalizations of interest using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes. Multivariate logistic regression model was used to calculate the adjusted OR (AOR) of IBD being the principal diagnosis for hospitalizations with and without a secondary diagnosis of psoriasis. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analyses were used accordingly to compare outcomes of hospitalizations for IBD with and without secondary diagnosis of psoriasis. There were over 71 million discharges included in the combined 2016 and 2017 NIS database. Hospitalizations with a secondary diagnosis of psoriasis have an AOR of 2.66 (95% CI 2.40 to 2.96, p<0.0001) of IBD being the principal reason for hospitalization compared with hospitalizations without psoriasis as a secondary diagnosis. IBD hospitalizations with coexisting psoriasis have similar lengths of stay, hospital charges, need for blood transfusion, and similar likelihood of having a secondary discharge diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis, gastrointestinal bleed, sepsis, and acute kidney injury compared with those without coexisting psoriasis. Patients with coexisting psoriasis have almost three times the odds of being admitted for IBD compared with patients without psoriasis. Hospitalizations for IBD with coexisting psoriasis have similar hospital outcomes compared with those without coexisting psoriasis., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© American Federation for Medical Research 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)