Published Online
on December 30, 2002

A more recent version of this article appeared on January 28, 2003

This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 107/3/384    most recent 01.CIR.0000051721.60127.EAv1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Goodney, P. P. Articles by Birkmeyer, J. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Goodney, P. P. Articles by Birkmeyer, J. D. Related Collections Health policy and outcome research Valvular heart disease CV surgery: aortic and vascular disease CV surgery: coronary artery disease CV surgery: valvular disease

Submitted on September 25, 2002
Revised on November 11, 2002
Accepted on November 21, 2002

Should Volume Standards for Cardiovascular Surgery Focus Only on High-Risk Patients?

Philip P. Goodney MD^*, F. L. Lucas PhD, and John D. Birkmeyer MD

From the VA Outcomes Group (P.P.G., J.D.B.), Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vt; Department of Surgery (P.P.G., J.D.B.), Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; and Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation (F.L.L.), Maine Medical Center, Portland.

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: philip.goodney{at}hitchcock.org.

Background—Payers and policy makers are attempting to concentrate selected cardiovascular procedures in high-volume centers. A recent analysis of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), however, suggests that volume-based referral initiatives should focus only on high-risk patients.

Methods and Results—Using the national Medicare database (1994 to 1999), we studied the operative mortality in patients undergoing 4 cardiovascular procedures (CABG, aortic valve replacement, mitral valve replacement, and elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair). We defined 2 categories of patient risk: high-risk (patients in the highest 25th percentile of predicted risk on the basis of a logistic regression model) and low-risk (patients in the lowest 75th percentile). We then compared operative mortality in patients undergoing surgery at very-high volume hospitals (VHVH, highest 20th percentile of procedure volume) and very-low volume hospitals (VLVH, lowest 20th percentile of procedure volume). Absolute differences in operative mortality between VLVH and VHVH were somewhat larger in high-risk patients. However, volume-related differences in mortality were also significant for low-risk patients undergoing one of the 4 procedures. In relative terms, the effect of hospital volume was similar in both high- and low-risk patients. For high- and low-risk patients, the relative risk (RR) of mortality between VHVH and VLVH were nearly equal for CABG (RR=0.78 for low-risk patients, RR=0.77 for high risk patients), aortic valve replacement (0.73 versus 0.76), mitral valve replacement (0.73 versus 0.74), and abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (0.51 versus 0.54).

Conclusions—Although the merits of volume-based referral initiatives can be debated on many grounds, there seems to be little rationale for restricting these initiatives to high-risk patients.

Key words: cardiovascular diseases • surgery • mortality • risk factors

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Judge, J. Chard, I. Learmonth, and P. Dieppe The effects of surgical volumes and training centre status on outcomes following total joint replacement: analysis of the Hospital Episode Statistics for England J. Public Health Med., June 1, 2006; 28(2): 116 - 124. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Kitterman, S. Kantanie, D. M. Rocke, and F. S. Kaplan Iatrogenic Harm Caused by Diagnostic Errors in Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva Pediatrics, November 1, 2005; 116(5): e654 - e661. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Zacharias, T. A. Schwann, C. J. Riordan, S. J. Durham, A. Shah, T. J. Papadimos, M. Engoren, and R. H. Habib Is Hospital Procedure Volume a Reliable Marker of Quality for Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery? A Comparison of Risk and Propensity Adjusted Operative and Midterm Outcomes Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2005; 79(6): 1961 - 1969. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. K. Nallamothu, S. Saint, T. P. Hofer, S. Vijan, K. A. Eagle, and S. J. Bernstein Impact of Patient Risk on the Hospital Volume-Outcome Relationship in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Arch Intern Med, February 14, 2005; 165(3): 333 - 337. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. A. Padalino, R. G. Ohye, E. J. Devaney, and E. L. Bove Double Intramural Coronary Arteries in D-Transposition of the Great Arteries Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2004; 78(6): 2181 - 2183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Wu, E. L. Hannan, T. J. Ryan, E. Bennett, A. T. Culliford, J. P. Gold, O. W. Isom, R. H. Jones, B. McNeil, E. A. Rose, et al. Is the Impact of Hospital and Surgeon Volumes on the In-Hospital Mortality Rate for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Limited to Patients at High Risk? Circulation, August 17, 2004; 110(7): 784 - 789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. D. Peterson, L. P. Coombs, E. R. DeLong, C. K. Haan, and T. B. Ferguson Procedural Volume as a Marker of Quality for CABG Surgery JAMA, January 14, 2004; 291(2): 195 - 201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. K. Nallamothu, K. A. Eagle, S. Saint, A. J. Epstein, S. S. Rathore, P. Goodney, J. D. Birkmeyer, and F. L. Lucas Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery, Hospital Volume, and Risk * Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery, Hospital Volume, and Risk * Response Circulation, July 8, 2003; 108 (1): e6 - e7. [Full Text] [PDF]