{"title":"在美国实施血管内冠状动脉碎石术","authors":"Abdul Rasheed Bahar MD , Yasemin Bahar MD , Ali Rabib MD , Nouraldeen Manasrah MD , Fethi Onal MD , Olayiwola Bolaji MD , Aiden Abidov MD, PhD , M. Chadi Alraies MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Disparities in health care access persist in cardiovascular interventions. Coronary lithotripsy, a novel treatment for calcified coronary lesions, shows variability in utilization by sociodemographic factors.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study examines the impact of sex, race, income, and hospital characteristics on lithotripsy use in the United States.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Using the 2021 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were identified. Lithotripsy was defined by the International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision codes. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the impact of sociodemographic factors, adjusting for comorbidities and hospital characteristics. Outcomes were compared using propensity score matching, with <em>P</em> < 0.05 considered significant.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 261,260 percutaneous coronary intervention patients, 1,000 (0.38%) underwent lithotripsy. Adjusted analyses revealed that women were less likely to receive lithotripsy than men (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.79; <em>P</em> < 0.001). African American patients had lower odds of receiving lithotripsy than Whites (aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.48-0.93; <em>P</em> = 0.016). Medicaid patients were less likely to receive lithotripsy (aOR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; <em>P</em> < 0.001) compared to Medicare beneficiaries. Higher-income quartiles increased odds of receiving lithotripsy compared to lower quartiles (aOR: 1.38-1.6; <em>P</em> < 0.05). Regional disparities were noted, with lower use in the South (aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.47-0.94; <em>P</em> = 0.022).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Disparities in lithotripsy utilization persist, driven by sex, race, insurance status, income, and geographic region. These findings emphasize the need for targeted interventions to promote equitable access to advanced cardiovascular therapies. While some disparities may reflect differences in disease prevalence, persistent inequities in treatment allocation warrant further investigation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73527,"journal":{"name":"JACC advances","volume":"4 10","pages":"Article 102099"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementation of Intravascular Coronary Lithotripsy in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Abdul Rasheed Bahar MD , Yasemin Bahar MD , Ali Rabib MD , Nouraldeen Manasrah MD , Fethi Onal MD , Olayiwola Bolaji MD , Aiden Abidov MD, PhD , M. Chadi Alraies MD, MPH\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Disparities in health care access persist in cardiovascular interventions. Coronary lithotripsy, a novel treatment for calcified coronary lesions, shows variability in utilization by sociodemographic factors.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study examines the impact of sex, race, income, and hospital characteristics on lithotripsy use in the United States.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Using the 2021 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were identified. Lithotripsy was defined by the International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision codes. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the impact of sociodemographic factors, adjusting for comorbidities and hospital characteristics. Outcomes were compared using propensity score matching, with <em>P</em> < 0.05 considered significant.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 261,260 percutaneous coronary intervention patients, 1,000 (0.38%) underwent lithotripsy. Adjusted analyses revealed that women were less likely to receive lithotripsy than men (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.79; <em>P</em> < 0.001). African American patients had lower odds of receiving lithotripsy than Whites (aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.48-0.93; <em>P</em> = 0.016). Medicaid patients were less likely to receive lithotripsy (aOR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; <em>P</em> < 0.001) compared to Medicare beneficiaries. Higher-income quartiles increased odds of receiving lithotripsy compared to lower quartiles (aOR: 1.38-1.6; <em>P</em> < 0.05). Regional disparities were noted, with lower use in the South (aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.47-0.94; <em>P</em> = 0.022).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Disparities in lithotripsy utilization persist, driven by sex, race, insurance status, income, and geographic region. These findings emphasize the need for targeted interventions to promote equitable access to advanced cardiovascular therapies. While some disparities may reflect differences in disease prevalence, persistent inequities in treatment allocation warrant further investigation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JACC advances\",\"volume\":\"4 10\",\"pages\":\"Article 102099\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JACC advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772963X25005241\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JACC advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772963X25005241","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在心血管干预措施中,卫生保健可及性的差异持续存在。冠状动脉碎石术是一种治疗钙化冠状动脉病变的新方法,其应用表现出不同的社会人口因素。目的:本研究探讨美国性别、种族、收入和医院特点对碎石术使用的影响。方法利用2021年全国住院患者样本,对接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者进行鉴定。碎石术的定义是国际疾病分类第十次修订代码。多变量逻辑回归评估了社会人口因素的影响,调整了合并症和医院特征。结果比较采用倾向评分匹配,P <; 0.05认为显著。结果261260例经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者中,有1000例(0.38%)行碎石术。校正分析显示,女性接受碎石术的可能性低于男性(校正OR [aOR]: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.79; P < 0.001)。非裔美国患者接受碎石术的几率低于白人(aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.48-0.93; P = 0.016)。与医疗保险受益人相比,医疗补助患者接受碎石的可能性较小(aOR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; P < 0.001)。与收入较低的四分之一人群相比,收入较高的四分之一人群接受碎石术的几率增加(比值比:1.38-1.6;P < 0.05)。注意到地区差异,南方的使用率较低(aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.47-0.94; P = 0.022)。结论受性别、种族、保险状况、收入和地理区域的影响,碎石术使用率存在差异。这些发现强调需要有针对性的干预措施,以促进公平获得先进的心血管治疗。虽然一些差异可能反映了疾病流行的差异,但在治疗分配方面持续存在的不平等值得进一步调查。
Implementation of Intravascular Coronary Lithotripsy in the United States
Background
Disparities in health care access persist in cardiovascular interventions. Coronary lithotripsy, a novel treatment for calcified coronary lesions, shows variability in utilization by sociodemographic factors.
Objectives
This study examines the impact of sex, race, income, and hospital characteristics on lithotripsy use in the United States.
Methods
Using the 2021 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were identified. Lithotripsy was defined by the International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision codes. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the impact of sociodemographic factors, adjusting for comorbidities and hospital characteristics. Outcomes were compared using propensity score matching, with P < 0.05 considered significant.
Results
Of 261,260 percutaneous coronary intervention patients, 1,000 (0.38%) underwent lithotripsy. Adjusted analyses revealed that women were less likely to receive lithotripsy than men (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.79; P < 0.001). African American patients had lower odds of receiving lithotripsy than Whites (aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.48-0.93; P = 0.016). Medicaid patients were less likely to receive lithotripsy (aOR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; P < 0.001) compared to Medicare beneficiaries. Higher-income quartiles increased odds of receiving lithotripsy compared to lower quartiles (aOR: 1.38-1.6; P < 0.05). Regional disparities were noted, with lower use in the South (aOR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.47-0.94; P = 0.022).
Conclusions
Disparities in lithotripsy utilization persist, driven by sex, race, insurance status, income, and geographic region. These findings emphasize the need for targeted interventions to promote equitable access to advanced cardiovascular therapies. While some disparities may reflect differences in disease prevalence, persistent inequities in treatment allocation warrant further investigation.