Background: Recent literature suggests implantable central venous access ports (ICVAPs) can be placed by interventional radiologists with fewer complications and lower expenses when compared with surgeons. An analysis of outcomes and expenses of ICVAP placement by service was conducted.

Methods: Three hundred sixty-eight ICVAPs were placed over 3 years at a 230-bed community teaching hospital. A retrospective review of these procedures was conducted. Data recorded for each procedure included patient demographics, reason for placement, indwelling port days, complications, billed charges, and reimbursement.

Results: Two hundred seventy-six (75%) ICVAPs were placed by interventional radiologists, while surgeons placed the remaining 92 ports (25%). Short-term complications were identified in 7 interventional radiologist-placed ports (2.5%) and 1 surgically placed port (1.1%), P = .42. Billed charges were greater for interventional radiologist-placed ports ($5,301 vs $4,552, P = .0001). In contrast, reimbursement was greater for surgically placed ports: interventional radiologist 31.3% of charges, surgery 42.8%, P = .049.

Conclusion: Reimbursement and charges demonstrated significant differences between surgeons and interventional radiologists. Prior assertions that ports placed by interventional radiologists are less expensive with fewer complications may no longer be valid.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.04.031DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

interventional radiologists
16
implantable central
8
central venous
8
venous access
8
access ports
8
icvaps interventional
8
fewer complications
8
billed charges
8
ports 25%
8
interventional radiologist-placed
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!