Medicare Payment for Calcium Modification Technologies Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, 2021-2022
Schlacter, J. A.; Yu, H.; Tsuruo, S.; Herrin, J.; Ross, J. S.; Horwitz, L. I.; Dhruva, S.
Show abstract
BackgroundThe Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) New Technology Add-on Payment (NTAP) program supports adoption of new, costly medical technologies demonstrating substantial clinical improvement. In 2021, CMS waived the "substantial clinical improvement" criterion for devices designated under the FDA Breakthrough Devices Program (BDP). This study characterized risk-standardized payments associated with hospitalizations in which Medicare beneficiaries received calcium modification during PCI for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) following the adoption of the Shockwave C2 Coronary Intravascular Lithotripsy (IVL) Catheter (Shockwave Medical) with BDP designation. MethodsWe analyzed Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for AMI who underwent PCI between January 2021 and December 2022, stratifying them into four groups: no calcium modification, rotational atherectomy (RA), orbital atherectomy (OA), and coronary IVL. Risk-standardized Medicare payments at 30 days, including index facility, physician, and post-acute care costs, were assessed using non-parametric median and chi-square tests. ResultsAmong 87,238 patients, 76,462 (87.6%) received no calcium modification, 8,316 (9.5%) underwent RA, 793 (0.9%) underwent OA, and 1,668 (1.9%) underwent IVL. IVL use increased from 1.6% in October 2021 to 4.4% in December 2022. Median total risk-standardized Medicare payments were significantly higher for patients receiving calcium modification technologies ($27,579 for IVL, $27,353 for OA, $23,240 for RA) compared to those without ($19,115; p<0.001). Payment differences were largest for index facility payments. ConclusionCoronary IVL during PCI for Medicare patients hospitalized for AMI was associated with significantly increased Medicare payments. Further studies must determine whether IVL, and calcium modification technologies in general, improve outcomes for patients hospitalized for AMI undergoing PCI and thus warrant higher payments via NTAP.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Persistent Inequities in Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the U.S.: Results from the NIS 94%
- Effectiveness of an Impella versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients who received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation 94%
- Myocardial Infarction across COVID-19 Pandemic Phases: Insights from the Veterans Health Affairs System 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- The effect of coronary revascularization treatment timing on mortality in patients with stable ischemic heart disease in British Columbia 95%
- Association of Mortality and Aspirin Prescription for COVID-19 Patients at the Veterans Health Administration 93%
- Effects of low versus high inspired oxygen fraction on myocardial injury after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A randomized clinical trial 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Two-Year Real World Clinical Outcomes after Intravascular Imaging Device Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Ultrathin-Strut Biodegradable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent 94%
- Impact of Anemia on Outcomes and Resource Utilization in Patients with Myocardial Infarction: A National Database Analysis 93%
- Temporal Variations in Ischemic and Bleeding Event Risks after Acute Coronary Syndrome during Dual Antiplatelet Therapy 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- General Health Checks in Adult Primary Care: A Review 89%
- Effect of Vitamin D 3 Supplementation vs Placebo on Hospital Length of Stay in Patients with Severe COVID-19: A Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Trial 86%
- Population Performance and Individual Agreement of Coronary Artery Disease Polygenic Risk Scores 85%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.