Next Article in Journal
Development and Validation of a Difficulty Scoring System for Laparoscopic Liver Resection to Treat Hepatolithiasis
Next Article in Special Issue
Differences between Very Highly Sensitized Kidney Transplant Recipients as Identified by Machine Learning Consensus Clustering
Previous Article in Journal
Case Report of Dermoscopic Aspects and Reflectance Confocal Microscopy Description of Segmental Leiomyoma and Relative Management
Previous Article in Special Issue
Clinical Phenotypes of Dual Kidney Transplant Recipients in the United States as Identified through Machine Learning Consensus Clustering
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Hospitalization Duration for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Temporal Analysis of 18-Year United States Data

by
Anusha G. Bhat
1,†,
Mandeep Singh
2,†,
Sri Harsha Patlolla
3,
Peter Matthew Belford
4,
David X. Zhao
4 and
Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula
4,*
1
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
2
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55901, USA
3
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55901, USA
4
Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston Salem, NC 27157, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Submission received: 25 November 2022 / Revised: 8 December 2022 / Accepted: 14 December 2022 / Published: 15 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Studies, Big Data, and Artificial Intelligence in Medicine)

Abstract

:
Background and objectives: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related outcomes in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have improved over time, but there are limited data on the length of stay (LOS) in relation to in-hospital mortality. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort of adult AMI admissions was identified from the National Inpatient Sample (2000–2017) and stratified into short (≤3 days) and long (>3 days) LOS. Outcomes of interest included temporal trends in LOS and associated in-hospital mortality, further sub-stratified based on demographics and comorbidities. Results: A total 11,622,528 admissions with AMI were identified, with a median LOS of 3 (interquartile range [IQR] 2–6) days with 49.9% short and 47.3% long LOS, respectively. In 2017, compared to 2000, temporal trends in LOS declined in all AMI, with marginal increases in LOS >3 days and decreases for ≤3 days (median 2 [IQR 1–3]) vs. long LOS (median 6 [IQR 5–9]). Patients with long LOS had lower rates of coronary angiography and PCI, but higher rates of non-cardiac organ support (respiratory and renal) and use of coronary artery bypass grafting. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality declined over time. Short LOS had comparable mortality to long LOS (51.3% vs. 48.6%) (p = 0.13); however, adjusted in-hospital mortality was higher in LOS >3 days when compared to LOS ≤ 3 days (adjusted OR 3.00, 95% CI 2.98–3.02, p < 0.001), with higher hospitalization (p < 0.001) when compared to long LOS. Conclusions: Median LOS in AMI, particularly in STEMI, has declined over the last two decades with a consistent trend in subgroup analysis. Longer LOS is associated with higher in-hospital mortality, higher hospitalization costs, and less frequent discharges to home compared to those with shorter LOS.

1. Introduction

Despite an increase in the risk and complexity, the success and safety of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have continued to improve, underscoring the need to review the determinants of the length of stay (LOS) during index hospitalization that may have significant cost implications [1,2]. The main drivers for prolonged LOS following PCI are post-procedure bleeding, acute stent thrombosis, fatal arrhythmias, or management of associated comorbid conditions. The use of radial access, newer stent designs, and modification of the antiplatelet protocols have reduced the incidence of stent thrombosis and bleeding complications [3].
The current European guidelines and the consensus decision from the American College of Cardiology recommend dismissal at 48–72 h following ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) of low-risk patients [4,5]. The safety of early dismissal of STEMI patients at 24–72 h has been reported [5]; however, the data are derived from small, older randomized trials or more contemporary single-center observational studies [5]. Additionally, no data are available among patients with non-STEMI (NSTEMI), the most common type of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the contemporary era [6]. We, therefore, sought to evaluate LOS in relation to inpatient mortality following STEMI and NSTEMI in the contemporary era from a nationally representative United States population. We also assessed temporal trends of LOS in all AMI and in subgroups based on demographics and comorbidities as other outcomes.

2. Material and Methods

The National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) is a database and software partnered by Federal-State-industry and funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). The database is the largest all-payer database of hospital inpatient stays in the United States. It was created to generate national estimates of inpatient usage, access to healthcare, hospital costs, and outcomes. It covers more than 97% of the US population and approximates a 20% stratified sample of all the US hospital discharges [7]. The database extracts deidentified information such as demographics, primary payer, comorbidities, principal diagnosis, up to 29 secondary diagnoses, and procedural diagnoses for each discharge from all the states participating in the HCUP. Since the information available through this database is publicly available and de-identified, Institutional Review Board approval was not necessary. Observations were identified as ‘admissions’ rather than being considered as individual patients. We used validated administrative codes, and we confined the variables to inpatient ones as the HCUP-NIS is limited by a lack of validation of its outpatient information.

2.1. Study Population, Variables, and Outcomes

We queried HCUP-NIS data from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2017 to identify adults (>18 years) with AMI in the primary diagnosis field (International Classification of Diseases 9.0 Clinical Modification [ICD-9CM] 410. x) [8,9,10]. AMI admissions without documented LOS were excluded. Prior studies have determined AMI administrative codes to have high sensitivity (98%) and specificity (91%), positive predictive value (95%), and negative predictive value (97%). Deyo’s modification of the Charlson Comorbidity Index was used to recognize comorbidities [11]. Demographic details such as age, sex, race, in-hospital events, comorbidities, cardiac procedures, and other invasive and non-invasive procedures were obtained using the methodologies previously used by our group (Supplementary Table S1) [8,9,10,12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Non-cardiac organ failure and multi-organ failure were defined in consistency with our prior work, where administrative codes were used to identify one or more organ systems’ involvement other than cardiovascular failure 8.
Due to the skewed nature of the length of stay (LOS) data toward longer LOS in terms of the mean ± standard deviation, it was evaluated using the median (interquartile range [IQR]). Similar to prior data, the LOS was divided into short (≤median LOS) and long (>median LOS) [19]. The primary outcomes of interest were temporal trends of hospitalizations stratified based on “short” (≤3 days) and “long” (>3 days) LOS in AMI. The secondary outcomes of interest were temporal trends in LOS stratified based on sex, presence or absence of cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, and in-hospital mortality outcomes.

2.2. Statistical Analysis

National estimates were created using discharge weights provided by the HCUP 7. Given the redesigns of NIS data since 2012, weights to produce national estimates were limited to discharge weights. Th HCUP-NIS issued the trend weights for re-weighing samples from 2000 to 2011, which were used to adjust for the 2012 HCUP-NIS redesign [20]. Pearson’s chi-squared tests were used for categorical variables (demographics, in-hospital characteristics, and clinical outcomes of AMI), ANOVA was carried out for comparison of LOS with demographic groups such as race, primary payer, median household income, Charlson Comorbidity Index, etc., and two-sided t-tests were used to compare continuous variables. Temporal trends in LOS stratified based on sex and clinical outcomes were plotted after sub-stratifying for the type of AMI. Univariable analysis was performed to assess trends and outcomes, represented as the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to analyze trends over time (referred to year 2000), and the ORs with 95% CIs were calculated for each year adjusting for age, sex, race, income status, comorbidities, primary payer, hospital characteristics, acute organ failure, cardiac arrest, cardiogenic shock, coronary angiography, PCI, pulmonary artery catheter use, mechanical circulatory device use, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, and acute hemodialysis. For the multivariable modeling, regression analysis with purposeful selection of statistically (liberal threshold of p < 0.20 in univariate analysis) and clinically relevant variables was conducted.
Two-tailed p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Given the large sample size, all p values that were statistically significant may not have been clinically significant. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 28.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

During the study period between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2017, we identified 11,622,528 admissions with AMI with a median LOS of 3 (interquartile range: 2–6) days (mean ± standard deviation 5 ± 5.8 days). Of these, 5,810,565 (49.9%) admissions had a short LOS (≤3 days) and 5,499,437 (47.3%) had a prolonged LOS (>3 days); other AMI admissions (2.7%) without documented LOS were excluded. In comparison to those with short LOS, the cohort with long LOS were more often older, female, bearing Medicare insurance, with higher co-morbidities, and admitted with a NSTEMI (p < 0.001) (Table 1). Overall, during the 18-year study period, there was a temporal decrease in mean LOS in all AMI, with a marginal decrease in shorter, but an increase in longer LOS (Figure 1A,B).
LOS in a STEMI population decreased, whereas it increased in a NSTEMI population (Figure 1B). When stratified by patient characteristics, LOS remained steady except for a marginal uptrend in LOS in the white and black race categories (Figure 2). There was a significant difference in short vs. long LOS based on means of demographics: race, primary payer, median income based on zip code, hospital size, location, hospital teaching status, and comorbidity (p < 0.001).
The cohort with a more extended stay had a more complicated hospitalization course, as noted by a higher prevalence of cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, and non-cardiac organ failure (Table 2). In addition, this cohort had a higher prevalence of ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation, atrial tachyarrhythmia, stroke, and a higher prevalence of in-hospital complications with vascular injury, bleeding, and blood transfusion (Table 2). The cohort with higher LOS had lower coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) but higher coronary artery bypass grafting surgery and non-cardiac organ support (Table 2). When LOS was stratified based on the type of AMI, the temporal trends in hospital stay showed a decline independent of sex, presence of cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, or mortality (Figure 3A–C).
Adjusted and unadjusted in-hospital mortality declined over time in both groups (Figure 1C,D). Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was comparable between the two groups (51.3% vs. 48.6%, p= 0.13); however, adjusted in-hospital mortality was higher in LOS > 3 days when compared to LOS ≤ 3 days (adjusted OR 3.00, 95% CI 2.98–3.02, p < 0.001) (Supplementary Table S2). Additionally, hospitalization costs were higher with longer LOS, and this cohort was discharged more often to skilled nursing facilities or homes with home healthcare (p < 0.001) (Table 3).

4. Discussion

In the current study evaluating the impact of LOS on outcomes in AMI, the median LOS was noted to be gradually declining over time. Admissions with longer LOS had higher comorbidities and in-hospital complications including single and multiorgan failure, cardiac arrest, cardiogenic shock, and non-cardiac organ support requirements and received higher rates of surgical as compared to percutaneous revascularization. After adjustment of confounding demographics and comorbidities, longer LOS still had a nearly three times higher risk of in-hospital mortality compared to short LOS.
An earlier study from the pre-2000 era noted a 50% decline in LOS in 1997–99 (5.9 days) compared to 1986–88 (11.7 days) among a population-based study [21]. Since then, small, randomized trials and a recent meta-analysis have demonstrated the safety of early dismissal among lower-risk patients [22,23]. A recent, single-center study of 600 patients with STEMI confirmed the safety of early dismissal [24]. Efforts toward early dismissal rest on identifying lower-risk patients by utilizing risk models such as ZWOLLE and GRACE and the absence of any bleeding, arrhythmia, or hemodynamic complications following successful PCI. We recently performed a prospective study among patients undergoing PCI (72.8% acute coronary syndrome) and determined that only 2.2% had actionable alarms that included fatal arrhythmias [25]. The median time of onset of arrhythmias was <6 h, underscoring the safety of early-dismissal protocols. The majority of events (bleeding, thrombosis, arrhythmias, and hemodynamic instability) happen within a few hours following primary PCI. Predictors of arrhythmia, bleeding, and hemodynamic instability overlap and can be easily identified following the completion of PCI. The success of PCI has improved to a level where most AMI patients, including STEMI, can be safely discharged following a few hours of observation [1]. Yet, safety concerns, limitations in opportunities for patient education, and lack of strategies to optimize the patient’s risk factor profile remain potential barriers to early dismissal. The current European guidelines still recommend dismissal at 48–72 h following STEMI of low-risk patients. No data are available for such measures among patients with NSTEMI, the most common type of AMI [26].
Our study demonstrated overall trends of decrease in LOS, mainly for STEMI whereas the trends increased steeply for patients presenting with NSTEMI. Patients with a higher comorbidity burden and challenging course, including a presentation with shock or cardiac arrest, stayed longer during an index hospital stay. In addition, management of comorbid conditions, the need for urgent CABG, and long-term care placement were additional determinants of LOS and higher mortality.
Interestingly, we found the unadjusted in-hospital mortality difference between the two LOS groups to be comparable, which changed after adjusting for comorbidities. Prior work from the HCUP-NIS by Jang et al. determined lower 30-day readmission rates and lower costs but at the expense of higher 30-day mortality among patients whose LOS was 1–2 days (HR 1.91; CI, 1.16–3.16) as compared to a LOS of 3 days, underscoring the need to monitor these patients closely following the discharge [27]. In an older study from Seattle area hospitals, the demographic and clinical characteristics explained 6%, and hospital complications, procedure use, and type an additional 27%; however, 29% of the variations in the LOS could not be explained based on the measured variables [28]. This is likely due to unmeasured clinical (frailty, comorbid conditions), administrative, hospital-related, or economic factors that determine the LOS of these patients and underscore the need for uniform systems of care.

Study Limitations

The HCUP-NIS has used several quality assurance measures to curtail errors, but has not been able to eliminate basic limitations that can impact research designs, statistical analysis, and data interpretation, which we took into account [20]. First, the data are observational and do not reliably identify etiologies for short or long lengths of stay, laboratory findings, or details about the medical therapies used to treat AMI. Second, accurate LOS based on the exact time of admission to discharge is not determinable given the nature of the database. Similarly, given the nature of the database, it is not possible to delineate type-1 from type-2 AMIs, but we included the AMI that primarily caused the admission, which effectively excluded type-2 AMIs since they would have had an alternate primary diagnosis as a trigger. Third, identification of AMI was based on appropriate documentation of the ICD codes. We noted a sharp increase in adjusted mortality trends in Figure 1D in the year 2015, likely due to the transition from ICD-9 to ICD-10 despite controlling for confounding. Lastly, due to reasons mentioned in our methods section, our results are limited to in-hospital outcomes and may not be extrapolated to long-term consequences; this is salient insofar as survivors of AMI hospitalization may have adverse outcomes after discharge from the hospital.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, in this 18-year national study, we found the median LOS to decline steadily, including in subgroups stratified based on sex, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, and mortality outcomes, except in NSTEMI. While unadjusted in-hospital mortality rates in short and long LOS admissions were not different, adjusting for comorbidities increased the mortality in long LOS by threefold. Longer LOS also incurred higher in-hospital complications, requiring higher organ support, and higher hospitalization costs. Much remains unknown about contributors to poor outcomes in NSTEMI and longer LOS, which needs further study across the population with AMI.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://0-www-mdpi-com.brum.beds.ac.uk/article/10.3390/medicina58121846/s1, Table S1: Administrative codes used for identification of diagnoses and procedures; Table S2: Multivariable regression for in-hospital mortality in for LOS in AMI.

Author Contributions

Study design, literature review, statistical analysis: A.G.B., M.S., S.H.P. and S.V. data management, data analysis, drafting manuscript: A.G.B., M.S., S.H.P. and S.V. access to data: A.G.B., S.H.P. and S.V. manuscript revision, intellectual revisions, mentorship: M.S., P.M.B., D.X.Z. and S.V. final approval: A.G.B., M.S., S.H.P., P.M.B., D.X.Z. and S.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Since the information available through this database is publicly available and de-identified, Institutional Review Board approval was not necessary. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

These data are publicly available with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors report no financial or intellectual conflict of interest related to this manuscript.

Abbreviations

AMIacute myocardial infarction
AORadjusted odds ratio
CABGcoronary artery bypass grafting
CIconfidence interval
CICUcardiac intensive care unit
CScardiogenic shock
HCUPHealthcare Cost and Utilization Project
ICD-9CMInternational Classification of Diseases-9 Clinical Modification
IQRinterquartile range
LOSlength of stay
NISNational/Nationwide Inpatient Sample
NSTEMInon-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
ORodds ratio
PCIpercutaneous coronary intervention
STEMIST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

References

  1. Melberg, T.; Jorgensen, M.; Orn, S.; Solli, T.; Edland, U.; Dickstein, K. Safety and health status following early discharge in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI: A randomized trial. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2015, 22, 1427–1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Chacko, L.; Howard, J.P.; Rajkumar, C.; Nowbar, A.N.; Kane, C.; Mahdi, D.; Foley, M.; Shun-Shin, M.; Cole, G.; Sen, S.; et al. Effects of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Death and Myocardial Infarction Stratified by Stable and Unstable Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 2020, 13, e006363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Al-Hijji, M.A.; Lennon, R.J.; Gulati, R.; El Sabbagh, A.; Park, J.Y.; Crusan, D.; Kanwar, A.; Behfar, A.; Lerman, A.; Holmes, D.R.; et al. Safety and Risk of Major Complications With Diagnostic Cardiac Catheterization. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2019, 12, e007791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Writing, C.; Rao, S.V.; Vidovich, M.I.; Gilchrist, I.C.; Gulati, R.; Gutierrez, J.A.; Hess, C.N.; Kaul, P.; Martinez, S.C.; Rymer, J. 2021 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Same-Day Discharge After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2021, 77, 811–825. [Google Scholar]
  5. Ibanez, B.; James, S.; Agewall, S.; Antunes, M.J.; Bucciarelli-Ducci, C.; Bueno, H.; Caforio, A.L.P.; Crea, F.; Goudevenos, J.A.; Halvorsen, S.; et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur. Heart J. 2018, 39, 119–177. [Google Scholar]
  6. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Patlolla, S.H.; Miller, P.E.; Cheungpasitporn, W.; Jaffe, A.S.; Gersh, B.J.; Holmes, D.R., Jr.; Bell, M.R.; Barsness, G.W. Weekend Effect in the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction in the United States, 2000–2016. Mayo Clin. Proc. Innov. Qual. Outcomes 2020, 4, 362–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. HCUP National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP); Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: Rockville, MD, USA, 2012.
  8. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Dunlay, S.M.; Prasad, A.; Kashani, K.; Sakhuja, A.; Gersh, B.J.; Jaffe, A.S.; Holmes, D.R., Jr.; Barsness, G.W. Acute Noncardiac Organ Failure in Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2019, 73, 1781–1791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Kumar, V.; Vallabhajosyula, S.; Subramaniam, A.V.; Patlolla, S.H.; Verghese, D.; Ya’Qoub, L.; Stulak, J.M.; Sandhu, G.S.; Prasad, A.; et al. Acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock in patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting: A 16-year national cohort analysis of temporal trends, management and outcomes. Int. J. Cardiol. 2020, 310, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Patlolla, S.H.; Dunlay, S.M.; Prasad, A.; Bell, M.R.; Jaffe, A.S.; Gersh, B.J.; Rihal, C.S.; Holmes, D.R., Jr.; Barsness, G.W. Regional Variation in the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock in the United States. Circ. Heart Fail. 2020, 13, e006661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Quan, H.; Sundararajan, V.; Halfon, P.; Fong, A.; Burnand, B.; Luthi, J.C.; Saunders, L.D.; Beck, C.A.; Feasby, T.E.; Ghali, W.A. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med. Care 2005, 43, 1130–1139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Dunlay, S.M.; Barsness, G.W.; Rihal, C.S.; Holmes, D.R., Jr.; Prasad, A. Hospital-Level Disparities in the Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock. Am. J. Cardiol. 2019, 124, 491–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Dunlay, S.M.; Barsness, G.W.; Vallabhajosyula, S.; Vallabhajosyula, S.; Sundaragiri, P.R.; Gersh, B.J.; Jaffe, A.S.; Kashani, K. Temporal trends, predictors, and outcomes of acute kidney injury and hemodialysis use in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0222894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Dunlay, S.M.; Kashani, K.; Vallabhajosyula, S.; Vallabhajosyula, S.; Sundaragiri, P.R.; Jaffe, A.S.; Barsness, G.W. Temporal trends and outcomes of prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation and tracheostomy use in acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock in the United States. Int. J. Cardiol. 2019, 285, 6–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Dunlay, S.M.; Prasad, A.; Sangaralingham, L.R.; Kashani, K.; Shah, N.D.; Jentzer, J.C. Cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest complicating ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in the United States, 2000–2017. Resuscitation 2020, 155, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Kashani, K.; Dunlay, S.M.; Vallabhajosyula, S.; Vallabhajosyula, S.; Sundaragiri, P.R.; Gersh, B.J.; Jaffe, A.S.; Barsness, G.W. Acute respiratory failure and mechanical ventilation in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction in the USA, 2000–2014. Ann. Intensive Care 2019, 9, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Prasad, A.; Bell, M.R.; Sandhu, G.S.; Eleid, M.F.; Dunlay, S.M.; Schears, G.J.; Stulak, J.M.; Singh, M.; Gersh, B.J.; et al. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Use in Acute Myocardial Infarction in the United States, 2000 to 2014. Circ. Heart Fail. 2019, 12, e005929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Vallabhajosyula, S.; Prasad, A.; Dunlay, S.M.; Murphree, D.H., Jr.; Ingram, C.; Mueller, P.S.; Gersh, B.J.; Holmes, D.R., Jr.; Barsness, G.W. Utilization of Palliative Care for Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction: A 15-Year National Perspective on Trends, Disparities, Predictors, and Outcomes. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2019, 8, e011954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Velagapudi, P.; Kolte, D.; Ather, K.; Khera, S.; Gupta, T.; Gordon, P.C.; Aronow, H.D.; Kirtane, A.J.; Abbott, J.D. Temporal Trends and Factors Associated With Prolonged Length of Stay in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Am. J. Cardiol. 2018, 122, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Khera, R.; Angraal, S.; Couch, T.; Welsh, J.W.; Nallamothu, B.K.; Girotra, S.; Chan, P.S.; Krumholz, H.M. Adherence to Methodological Standards in Research Using the National Inpatient Sample. JAMA 2017, 318, 2011–2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Spencer, F.A.; Lessard, D.; Gore, J.M.; Yarzebski, J.; Goldberg, R.J. Declining length of hospital stay for acute myocardial infarction and postdischarge outcomes: A community-wide perspective. Arch. Intern. Med. 2004, 164, 733–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Azzalini, L.; Millan, X.; Ly, H.Q.; L’Allier, P.L.; Jolicoeur, E.M. Direct stenting versus pre-dilation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Interv. Cardiol. 2015, 28, 119–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Gong, W.; Li, A.; Ai, H.; Shi, H.; Wang, X.; Nie, S. Safety of early discharge after primary angioplasty in low-risk patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2018, 25, 807–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Rathod, K.S.; Comer, K.; Casey-Gillman, O.; Moore, L.; Mills, G.; Ferguson, G.; Antoniou, S.; Patel, R.; Fhadil, S.; Damani, T.; et al. Early Hospital Discharge Following PCI for Patients With STEMI. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2021, 78, 2550–2560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Al-Hijji, M.A.; Gulati, R.; Bell, M.; Kaplan, R.J.; Feind, J.L.; Lewis, B.R.; Borah, B.J.; Moriarty, J.P.; Yoon Park, J.; El Sabbagh, A.; et al. Routine Continuous Electrocardiographic Monitoring Following Percutaneous Coronary Interventions. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2020, 13, e008290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Collet, J.P.; Thiele, H.; Barbato, E.; Barthelemy, O.; Bauersachs, J.; Bhatt, D.L.; Dendale, P.; Dorobantu, M.; Edvardsen, T.; Folliguet, T.; et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. Eur. Heart J. 2021, 42, 1289–1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Jang, S.J.; Yeo, I.; Feldman, D.N.; Cheung, J.W.; Minutello, R.M.; Singh, H.S.; Bergman, G.; Wong, S.C.; Kim, L.K. Associations Between Hospital Length of Stay, 30-Day Readmission, and Costs in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Nationwide Readmissions Database Analysis. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2020, 9, e015503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Every, N.R.; Spertus, J.; Fihn, S.D.; Hlatky, M.; Martin, J.S.; Weaver, W.D. Length of hospital stay after acute myocardial infarction in the Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention (MITI) Project registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1996, 28, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Trends in overall length of stay in acute myocardial infarction. Legend: (A) Unadjusted temporal trends in mean length of stay in AMI (p < 0.001 for trend over time); (B) unadjusted length of stay stratified based on type of AMI and LOS (≤3 days vs. >3 days) in the hospital in AMI; (C): unadjusted in-hospital mortality in AMI based on LOS; (D): adjusted in-hospital mortality in AMI based on LOS (with 2000 as the referent); p < 0.001 for trend over time. Adjusted for age, sex, race, income status, comorbidity, primary payer, hospital region, hospital location, teaching status, hospital bed size, type of MI, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, acute organ failure, atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, pulmonary artery catheterization, mechanical circulatory support, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, and acute hemodialysis (p < 0.001 for trend over time). Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction, LOS: length of stay.
Figure 1. Trends in overall length of stay in acute myocardial infarction. Legend: (A) Unadjusted temporal trends in mean length of stay in AMI (p < 0.001 for trend over time); (B) unadjusted length of stay stratified based on type of AMI and LOS (≤3 days vs. >3 days) in the hospital in AMI; (C): unadjusted in-hospital mortality in AMI based on LOS; (D): adjusted in-hospital mortality in AMI based on LOS (with 2000 as the referent); p < 0.001 for trend over time. Adjusted for age, sex, race, income status, comorbidity, primary payer, hospital region, hospital location, teaching status, hospital bed size, type of MI, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, acute organ failure, atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, pulmonary artery catheterization, mechanical circulatory support, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, and acute hemodialysis (p < 0.001 for trend over time). Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction, LOS: length of stay.
Medicina 58 01846 g001
Figure 2. Temporal trends of LOS (in days) based on patient characteristics. Legend: Percentage of AMI admissions with LOS based on age (A), sex (B), and race (C). Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction, LOS: length of stay.
Figure 2. Temporal trends of LOS (in days) based on patient characteristics. Legend: Percentage of AMI admissions with LOS based on age (A), sex (B), and race (C). Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction, LOS: length of stay.
Medicina 58 01846 g002
Figure 3. Temporal trends for LOS in AMI based on clinical and co-morbid conditions. Legend: A: Temporal trends LOS based on sex (A), presence of CS (B), CA (C), and mortality (D), stratified by type of AMI (p < 0.001 for trend over time for all). Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction; CA: cardiac arrest; CS: cardiogenic shock; NSTEMI: non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; STEMI: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Figure 3. Temporal trends for LOS in AMI based on clinical and co-morbid conditions. Legend: A: Temporal trends LOS based on sex (A), presence of CS (B), CA (C), and mortality (D), stratified by type of AMI (p < 0.001 for trend over time for all). Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction; CA: cardiac arrest; CS: cardiogenic shock; NSTEMI: non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; STEMI: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Medicina 58 01846 g003
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of AMI admissions LOS ≤ 3 days and LOS > 3 days.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of AMI admissions LOS ≤ 3 days and LOS > 3 days.
Characteristic
(N = 11,622,528)
LOS ≤ 3 Days
(N = 5,810,565)
LOS > 3 Days (N = 5,499,437)p
Age (years, mean ± standard deviation)64.9 ± 14.270.3 ± 13.6<0.001
Female (%)36.143.5<0.001
Race (%)White64.762.5<0.001
Black7.58.5
Others a27.829.0
Primary payer (%)Medicare49.865.8<0.001
Medicaid6.46.0
Private34.021.4
Others b9.86.8
Quartile of median household income for zip code (%)0–25th24.024.8<0.001
26th–50th27.327.0
51st–75th24.824.2
75th–100th23.924.0
Charlson Comorbidity Index (%)0–348.525.9<0.001
4–639.249.9
≥712.324.2
Cardiogenic shock (%)2.56.8<0.001
Cardiac arrest (%)3.65.9<0.001
Hypertension (%)62.362.9<0.001
Hyperlipidemia (%)52.942.4<0.001
Heart failure (%)4.49.8<0.001
Hospital teaching
status and location (%)
Rural11.99.3<0.001
Urban non-teaching39.739.2
Urban teaching48.451.5
Hospital bed-size (%)Small12.49.5<0.001
Medium26.524.2
Large61.266.3
Hospital region (%)Northeast17.921.5<0.001
Midwest23.522.1
South39.341.0
West19.315.4
Legend: a Hispanic, Asian or Pacific Islander, Native American, Others; b Self-Pay, No Charge, Others. Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction; LOS: length of stay.
Table 2. In-hospital characteristics of AMI admissions LOS ≤ 3 days and LOS > 3 days.
Table 2. In-hospital characteristics of AMI admissions LOS ≤ 3 days and LOS > 3 days.
Characteristic
(N = 11,622,528)
LOS ≤ 3 Days (N = 5,810,565)LOS > 3 Days (N = 5,499,437)p
AMI type (%)ST-segment elevation AMI38.634.6<0.001
Non-ST-segment elevation AMI61.465.4
Acute non-cardiac organ failure (%)Overall4.015.1<0.001
Respiratory3.913.3<0.001
Hepatic0.51.5<0.001
Renal5.618.4<0.001
Hematologic1.75.9<0.001
Neurologic1.54.9<0.001
In-hospital events (%)Ventricular arrhythmias5.910.2<0.001
Atrial fibrillation10.723.40.048
Systolic heart failure4.49.8<0.001
Stroke0.72.9<0.001
Ischemic stroke0.62.7<0.001
Intracranial hemorrhage0.10.3<0.001
Acute pulmonary embolism0.10.6<0.001
Cardiac procedures (%)Coronary angiography67.761.6<0.001
Percutaneous coronary intervention51.632.6<0.001
Coronary artery bypass grafting0.219.2<0.001
Fibrinolytics2.01.5<0.001
Mechanical circulatory support1.68.0<0.001
Pulmonary artery catheterization0.32.0<0.001
Non-cardiac procedures (%)Invasive mechanical ventilation2.89.0<0.001
Non-invasive mechanical ventilation0.72.4<0.001
Acute hemodialysis0.11.1<0.001
Complications (%)Ventricular septal defect0.10.10.56
Hemorrhage0.34.1<0.001
Vascular injury0.41.30.531
Blood transfusion1.612.0<0.001
Palliative care consultation (%)1.0%1.4<0.001
Do not resuscitate status (%)2.3%2.7<0.001
Legend: Represented as percentage or mean ± standard deviation. Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction; LOS: length of stay.
Table 3. Clinical outcomes of AMI admissions with LOS ≤ 3 days and LOS > 3 days.
Table 3. Clinical outcomes of AMI admissions with LOS ≤ 3 days and LOS > 3 days.
Characteristic
(N = 11,622,528)
LOS ≤ 3 Days
(N = 5,810,565)
LOS > 3 Days (N = 5,499,437)p
In-hospital mortality (%)51.348.60.13
Hospitalization costs (×1000 United States Dollars)39 (14–54)54 (28–101)<0.001
Discharge disposition (%)Home73.553.2<0.001
Transfer16.65.3
Skilled nursing facility4.523.2
Home with home healthcare4.117.9
Against medical advice1.20.4
Legend: Represented as percentage or median (interquartile range). Abbreviations: AMI: acute myocardial infarction; LOS: length of stay.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bhat, A.G.; Singh, M.; Patlolla, S.H.; Belford, P.M.; Zhao, D.X.; Vallabhajosyula, S. Hospitalization Duration for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Temporal Analysis of 18-Year United States Data. Medicina 2022, 58, 1846. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina58121846

AMA Style

Bhat AG, Singh M, Patlolla SH, Belford PM, Zhao DX, Vallabhajosyula S. Hospitalization Duration for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Temporal Analysis of 18-Year United States Data. Medicina. 2022; 58(12):1846. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina58121846

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bhat, Anusha G., Mandeep Singh, Sri Harsha Patlolla, Peter Matthew Belford, David X. Zhao, and Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula. 2022. "Hospitalization Duration for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Temporal Analysis of 18-Year United States Data" Medicina 58, no. 12: 1846. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina58121846

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop