The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients

Mohammad Reza Movahed; Allistair Nathan; Mehrtash Hashemzadeh

doi:10.5114/aic.2024.142231

eISSN: 1897-4295
ISSN: 1734-9338

Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej

Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Subscription Contact Instructions for authors Publication charge Ethical standards and procedures

Editorial System

Submit your Manuscript

Editorial Policies

Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications

3/2024
vol. 20

Send email

Copy url:

abstract:

Original paper

The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients

Mohammad Reza Movahed

^{1, 2}

,

Allistair Nathan

²

,

Mehrtash Hashemzadeh

²

Sarver Heart Center, Department of Med icine, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States
Department of Medicine, University of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, United States

Adv Interv Cardiol 2024; 20, 3 (77): 271–276

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2024.142231

Online publish date: 2024/08/13

View full text Get citation

EndNote

Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero

AMA

Movahed M, Nathan A, Hashemzadeh M. The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej. 2024;20(3):271-276. doi:10.5114/aic.2024.142231.

APA

Movahed, M., Nathan, A.,  & Hashemzadeh, M. (2024). The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej, 20(3), 271-276. https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2024.142231

Chicago

Movahed, Mohammad Reza, Allistair Nathan,  and Mehrtash Hashemzadeh. 2024. "The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients". Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej 20 (3): 271-276. doi:10.5114/aic.2024.142231.

Harvard

Movahed, M., Nathan, A.,  and Hashemzadeh, M. (2024). The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej, 20(3), pp.271-276. https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2024.142231

MLA

Movahed, Mohammad Reza et al. "The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients." Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej, vol. 20, no. 3, 2024, pp. 271-276. doi:10.5114/aic.2024.142231.

Vancouver

Movahed M, Nathan A, Hashemzadeh M. The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej. 2024;20(3):271-276. doi:10.5114/aic.2024.142231.

Introduction:
The effect of using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on short-term mortality is not well established.

Aim:
To evaluate any association between the use of IVUS vs. no IVUS during PCI and mortality in a large inpatient database.

Material and methods:
We used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database for available ICD-10 codes from 2016–2020 for IVUS and PCIs.

Results:
A total of 10,059,56 PCIs were performed. In 206,910, IVUS-guided PCI was performed vs. 9,852,359 without IVUS. Mortality did not differ between the two groups, with 2.52% mortality in the IVUS arm vs. 2.59% in no IVUS cohort, p = 0.4. The mean age of patients with IVUS use was 65.5 vs. 70.1 years without IVUS, p < 0.001. Total in-hospital cost in the IVUS group was double that without IVUS ($141,920 vs. $71,568, p < 0.001). Furthermore, IVUS utilization was significantly higher in patients with private health insurance (28.3% vs. 17.2%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions:
In-patient all-cause mortality using IVUS during PCI was similar to that in patients without IVUS utilization, but the cost was doubled, with higher utilization in privately insured patients.

keywords:

percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), stenting, mortality, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), coronary imaging, intracoronary imaging, optical coherence tomography, IVUS guided PCI

The use of intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous coronary intervention does not reduce all cause in-hospital mortality but doubles the cost, with higher utilization in privately insured patients

Mohammad Reza Movahed 1, 2 , Allistair Nathan 2 , Mehrtash Hashemzadeh 2

percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), stenting, mortality, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), coronary imaging, intracoronary imaging, optical coherence tomography, IVUS guided PCI

Mohammad Reza Movahed

^{1, 2}

,

Allistair Nathan

²

,

Mehrtash Hashemzadeh

²