Hospital economic impact from hemostatic matrix usage in cardiac surgery

Abstract

Objective:

Improved health outcomes can result in economic savings for hospitals and payers. While effectiveness of topical hemostatic agents in cardiac surgery has been demonstrated, evaluations of their economic benefit are limited. This study quantifies the cost consequences to hospitals, based on clinical outcomes, from using a flowable hemostatic matrix vs non-flowable topical hemostatic agents in cardiac surgery.

Research design and methods:

Applying clinical outcomes from a prospective randomized clinical trial, a cost consequence framework was utilized to model the economic impact of comparator groups. From that study, clinical outcomes were obtained and analyzed for a flowable hemostatic matrix (FLOSEAL, Baxter Healthcare Corporation) vs non-flowable topical hemostats (SURGICEL Nu-Knit, Ethicon–Johnson & Johnson; GELFOAM, Pfizer). Costing analyses focused on the following outcomes: complications, blood transfusions, surgical revisions, and operating room (OR) time. Cardiac surgery costs were analyzed and expressed in 2012 US dollars based on available literature searches and US data. Comparator group variability in cost consequences (i.e., cost savings) was calculated based on annualized impact and scenario testing.

Results:

Results suggest that if a flowable hemostatic matrix (rather than a non-flowable hemostat) was utilized exclusively in 600 mixed cardiac surgeries annually, a hospital could improve patient outcomes by a reduction of 33 major complications, 76 minor complications, 54 surgical revisions, 194 transfusions, and 242 h of OR time. These outcomes correspond to a net annualized cost consequence savings of $5.38 million, with complication avoidance as the largest contributor.

Conclusions:

This cost consequence framework and supportive modeling was used to evaluate the hospital economic impact of outcomes resulting from the usage of various hemostatic agents. These analyses support that cost savings can be achieved from routine use of a flowable hemostatic matrix, rather than a non-flowable topical hemostat, in cardiac surgery.

Keywords::

• Hemostatic matrix
• Cardiac surgery
• Transfusions
• Complications
• Hospital economic impact

Transparency

Declaration of funding

This study was funded by Baxter Healthcare Corporation.

Declaration of financial/other relationships

Scott Tackett and Huub Kreuwel are paid employees of Baxter Healthcare Corporation. Rebecca Sugarman and Piedad Alvarez are paid employees of Evidera, which received funding from Baxter Healthcare Corporation for this work. Dr. Giuseppe Nasso was a former paid consultant for Baxter Healthcare Corporation, but received no payments related to this study.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Michael Byrnes for his contributions to the preparation of this manuscript.