Search

ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether the COVID-19 pandemic altered the racial and ethnic composition of patients receiving cardiac procedural care.DesignThis was a retrospective observational study.SettingThis study was conducted at a single tertiary-care university hospital.ParticipantsA total of 1,704 adult patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) (n=413), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (n=506), or atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation (n=785) from March 2019 through March 2022 were included in this study.InterventionsNo interventions were performed as this was a retrospective observational study.Measurements and main resultsPatients were grouped based on the date of their procedure: pre-COVID (March 2019 to February 2020), COVID Year 1 (March 2020 to February 2021), and COVID Year 2 (March 2021 to March 2022). Population-adjusted procedural incidence rates during each period were examined and stratified based on race and ethnicity. The procedural incidence rate was higher for White patients versus Black, and non-Hispanic patients versus Hispanic patients for every procedure and every period. For TAVR, the difference in procedural rates between White patients versus Black patients decreased between the pre-COVID and COVID Year 1 (12.05-6.34 per 1,000,000 persons). For CABG, the difference in procedural rates between White patients versus Black, and non-Hispanic patients versus Hispanic patients did not change significantly. For AF ablations, the difference in procedural rates between White patients versus Black patients increased over time (13.06 to 21.55 to 29.64 per 1,000,000 persons in the pre-COVID, COVID Year 1, and COVID Year 2, respectively).ConclusionRacial and ethnic disparities in access to cardiac procedural care were present throughout all study time periods at the authors' institution. Their findings reinforce the continuing need for initiatives to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare. Further studies are needed to fully elucidate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare access and delivery.

ImportanceFor patients with end-stage kidney disease treated with hemodialysis, the optimal timing of hemodialysis prior to elective surgical procedures is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess whether a longer interval between hemodialysis and subsequent surgery is associated with higher postoperative mortality in patients with end-stage kidney disease treated with hemodialysis.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsRetrospective cohort study of 1 147 846 procedures among 346 828 Medicare beneficiaries with end-stage kidney disease treated with hemodialysis who underwent surgical procedures between January 1, 2011, and September 30, 2018. Follow-up ended on December 31, 2018.ExposuresOne-, two-, or three-day intervals between the most recent hemodialysis treatment and the surgical procedure. Hemodialysis on the day of the surgical procedure vs no hemodialysis on the day of the surgical procedure.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was 90-day postoperative mortality. The relationship between the dialysis-to-procedure interval and the primary outcome was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model.ResultsOf the 1 147 846 surgical procedures among 346 828 patients (median age, 65 years [IQR, 56-73 years]; 495 126 procedures [43.1%] in female patients), 750 163 (65.4%) were performed when the last hemodialysis session occurred 1 day prior to surgery, 285 939 (24.9%) when the last hemodialysis session occurred 2 days prior to surgery, and 111 744 (9.7%) when the last hemodialysis session occurred 3 days prior to surgery. Hemodialysis was also performed on the day of surgery for 193 277 procedures (16.8%). Ninety-day postoperative mortality occurred after 34 944 procedures (3.0%). Longer intervals between the last hemodialysis session and surgery were significantly associated with higher risk of 90-day mortality in a dose-dependent manner (2 days vs 1 day: absolute risk, 4.7% vs 4.2%, absolute risk difference, 0.6% [95% CI, 0.4% to 0.8%], adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.14 [95% CI, 1.10 to 1.18]; 3 days vs 1 day: absolute risk, 5.2% vs 4.2%, absolute risk difference, 1.0% [95% CI, 0.8% to 1.2%], adjusted HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.19 to 1.31]; and 3 days vs 2 days: absolute risk, 5.2% vs 4.7%, absolute risk difference, 0.4% [95% CI, 0.2% to 0.6%], adjusted HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.04 to 1.13]). Undergoing hemodialysis on the same day as surgery was associated with a significantly lower hazard of mortality vs no same-day hemodialysis (absolute risk, 4.0% for same-day hemodialysis vs 4.5% for no same-day hemodialysis; absolute risk difference, −0.5% [95% CI, −0.7% to −0.3%]; adjusted HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.84-0.91]). In the analyses that evaluated the interaction between the hemodialysis-to-procedure interval and same-day hemodialysis, undergoing hemodialysis on the day of the procedure significantly attenuated the risk associated with a longer hemodialysis-to-procedure interval (PConclusions and RelevanceAmong Medicare beneficiaries with end-stage kidney disease, longer intervals between hemodialysis and surgery were significantly associated with higher risk of postoperative mortality, mainly among those who did not receive hemodialysis on the day of surgery. However, the magnitude of the absolute risk differences was small, and the findings are susceptible to residual confounding.