Back to Search Start Over

Editor's Choice – Distribution of Care and Hospital Incidence of Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting: A Secondary Analysis of German Hospital Episode Data

Authors :
Michael Salvermoser
Sofie Schmid
Pavlos Tsantilas
Andreas Kuehnl
Michael Kallmayer
Matthias Trenner
Christoph Knappich
Hans-Henning Eckstein
Source :
European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 62:167-176
Publication Year :
2021
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2021.

Abstract

Objective This is a description of the German healthcare landscape regarding carotid artery disease, assessment of hospital incidence time courses for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS), and simulation of potential effects of minimum hospital caseload requirements for CEA and CAS. Methods The study is a secondary data analysis of diagnosis related group statistics data (2005–2016), provided by the German Federal Statistical Office. Cases encoded by German operation procedure codes for CEA or CAS and by International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes for carotid artery disease were included. Hospitals were categorised into quartiles according to annual caseloads. Linear distances to the closest hospital fulfilling hypothetical caseload requirements were calculated. Results A total of 132 411 and 33 709 patients treated with CEA and CAS from 2012 to 2016 were included. CEA patients had lower rates of myocardial infarction (1.4% vs. 1.8%) and death (1.2% vs. 4.0%), and CAS patients were more often treated after emergency admission (38.1% vs. 27.1%). Age standardised annual hospital incidences were 67.2 per 100 000 inhabitants for CEA and 16.3 per 100 000 inhabitants for CAS. The incidence for CEA declined from 2005 to 2016, with CAS rising again until 2016 after having declined from 2010 to 2013. Regarding distance from home to hospital, centres offering CEA are distributed more homogeneously across Germany, compared with those performing CAS. Hypothetical introduction of minimum annual caseloads (> 20 for CEA; > 10 for CAS) imply that 75% of the population would reach their hospital after travelling 45 km for CEA and 70 km for CAS. Conclusion Differences in spatial distribution mean that statutory minimum annual caseloads would have a greater impact on CAS accessibility than CEA in Germany. Presumably because of a decline in carotid artery disease and a transition towards individualised therapy for asymptomatic patients, hospital incidence for CEA has been declining.

Details

ISSN :
10785884
Volume :
62
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....f060ce2ee8ef64d0845d37deb9f6893d