Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:There is increasing evidence questioning the use of warfarin for atrial fibrillation (AF) among older adults with end stage renal disease (ESRD). We assessed the patterns and determinants of warfarin utilization among these patients in the US. METHODS:We assembled a cohort of older adults (age ≥65) undergoing dialysis with incident AF from July 2007 to November 2011 from the US Renal Data System (USRDS). We used descriptive statistics to characterize warfarin utilization within 30 days of AF discharge, and logistic regression to quantify patient characteristics associated with warfarin initiation. RESULTS:Among 5730 older adults undergoing dialysis with incident AF, 15.5% initiated warfarin. Among 2906 patients with high risk of bleeding, 12.7% initiated warfarin; whereas 14.9% initiated warfarin among 4824 patients with high risk of stroke. After adjustment for patient characteristics, warfarin initiation was lower among patients who were older [odds ratio (OR) = 0.74 per 10-year increase, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.83] and those with a history of diabetes (OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.90), myocardial infarction (OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.80), or bleeding (OR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.50-0.80). There was no association between sex, race, or dialysis modality and warfarin initiation. Among patients who initiated warfarin, 46.8% discontinued warfarin use after a median treatment length of 8.6 months. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Despite the unclear benefit and increased bleeding risk of warfarin treatment in patients with ESRD, 1 in 8 older adults undergoing dialysis with incident AF in the US who had high risk of bleeding used warfarin. Changes to warfarin therapy due to discontinuation were common after initiation.

The required intensity of monitoring for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) after of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation is not clearly formulized. We retrospectively evaluated a single-center cohort of 115 ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplant recipients, of which 32% were also HLA-incompatible (ABOi/HLAi) with their donors. We used an adjusted negative binomial model to evaluate risk factors for late AMR. Using this model, we risk-stratified patients into high- and low-risk groups for the development of late AMR. 26% of patients had at least one AMR episode. 49% of AMR episodes occurred within 30-days after transplant and were considered early AMR. Patients with an early AMR episode had a 5.5-fold greater incidence of developing late AMR (IRR=5.5,[95%CI:1.5-19.3],p=0.01). ABOi/HLAi recipients trended towards increased late AMR risk (IRR=1.9,[95%CI:0.5-6.6],p=0.3). High-risk recipients (those with an early AMR or those who were ABOi/HLAi) had a 6-fold increased incidence of late AMR (IRR=6.3,[95%CI:1.6-24.6],p=0.008) versus low-risk recipients. The overall incidence of late AMR was 20.8% versus 1.5% in low-risk recipients. Changes in anti-A/B titer did not correlate with late AMR (IRR=0.9 per log titer increase, p=0.7). This risk-stratification scheme uses information available within 30-days of ABOi transplantation to determine risk for late AMR and can help direct longitudinal follow-up for individual patients

Older patients with ESRD who receive a kidney transplant (KT) may develop post-KT dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD) associated with their long-standing kidney disease and/or neurotoxic immunosuppressant agents. To investigate this possibility, we studied 40,918 older (aged ≥55 years) KT recipients (January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2011) linked to Medicare claims through the US Renal Data System. We estimated dementia and AD risk (cumulative incidence) and studied factors associated with these sequelae using competing risks models. We estimated the risk of death-censored graft loss and mortality after developing dementia or the AD subtype of dementia, separately, using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Older recipients had a 10-year dementia risk ranging from 5.1% for recipients aged 55-60 years to 17.0% for recipients aged ≥75 years; 10-year AD risk ranged from 1.0% to 6.7%, respectively. The strongest predictors for dementia and AD were older recipient age and pretransplant diabetes. The 10-year graft loss risk was 28.8% for those who did not develop dementia and 43.1% for those who did, and the corresponding mortality risks were 55.7% and 89.9%, respectively. Older recipients with dementia had a 1.52-fold (95% confidence interval, 1.39 to 1.68) increased risk of graft loss and a 2.38-fold (95% confidence interval, 2.26 to 2.49) increased risk of mortality. We observed similar results for AD. We conclude that older KT recipients have a high risk of post-KT dementia and AD, and these sequelae associate with a profound effect on patient and graft survival.

BACKGROUND:The Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PSSA) is a government initiative that requires all biomedical companies to publicly disclose payments to physicians through the Open Payments Program (OPP). The goal of this study was to use the OPP database and evaluate all nonresearch-related financial transactions between plastic surgeons and biomedical companies. METHODS:Using the first wave of OPP data published on September 30, 2014, we studied the national distribution of industry payments made to plastic surgeons during a 5-month period. We explored whether a plastic surgeon's scientific productivity (as determined by their h-index), practice setting (private versus academic), geographic location, and subspecialty were associated with payment amount. RESULTS:Plastic surgeons (N = 4195) received a total of US $5,278,613. The median (IQR) payment to a plastic surgeon was US $115 (US $35-298); mean, US $158. The largest payment to an individual was US $341,384. The largest payment category was non-CEP speaker fees (US $1,709,930) followed by consulting fees (US $1,403,770). Plastic surgeons in private practice received higher payments per surgeon compared with surgeons in academic practice (median [IQR], US $165 [US $81-$441] vs median [IQR], US $112 [US $33-$291], rank-sum P < 0.001). Among academic plastic surgeons, a higher h-index was associated with 77% greater chance of receiving at least US $1000 in total payments (RR/10 unit h-index increase = 1.47 1.772.11, P < 0.001). This association was not seen among plastic surgeons in private practice (RR = 0.89 1.091.32, P < 0.4). CONCLUSIONS:Plastic surgeons in private practice receive higher payments from industry. Among academic plastic surgeons, higher payments were associated with higher h-indices.

BACKGROUND:The Physician Payment Sunshine Act was implemented to provide transparency to financial transactions between industry and physicians. Under this law, the Open Payments Program (OPP) was created to publicly disclose all transactions and inform patients of potential conflicts of interest. Collaboration between industry and cardiothoracic surgeon-scientists is essential in developing new approaches to treating patients with cardiac disease. The objective of this study is to characterize industry payments to cardiothoracic surgeons as reported by the OPP. METHODS:We used the first wave of Physician Payment Sunshine Act data (August 2013 to December 2013) to assess industry payments made to cardiothoracic surgeons. RESULTS:Cardiothoracic surgeons (n = 2,495) received a total of $4,417,545 during a 5-month period. Cardiothoracic surgeons comprised 0.5% of all persons in the OPP and received 0.9% of total disclosed industry funding. Among cardiothoracic surgeons receiving funding, 34% received payments less than $100, 43% received payments of $100 to $999, 19% received payments of $1,000 to $9,999, 4% received payments of $10,000 to $99,999, and 0.2% received payments of more than $100,000. The median was $181 (interquartile range [IQR]: $60 to $843) and the mean ± SD was $1,771 ± $7,664. The largest payment to an individual surgeon was $159,444. The three largest median payments made to cardiothoracic surgeons by expense category were royalty fees $8,398 (IQR: $536 to $12,316), speaker fees $3,600 (IQR: $1,500 to $8,000), and honoraria $3,344 (IQR: $1,563 to $7,350). CONCLUSIONS:Among cardiothoracic surgeons who are listed as recipients of nonresearch industry payments, 50% of cardiothoracic surgeons received less than $181. Awareness of the OPP data is critical for cardiothoracic surgeons, as it provides a means to prevent potential public misconceptions about industry payments within the specialty that may affect patient trust.

Under the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, "payments or transfers of value" by biomedical companies to physicians must be disclosed through the Open Payments Program. Designed to provide transparency of financial transactions between medication and device manufacturers and health care providers, the Open Payments Program shows financial relationships between industry and health care providers. Awareness of this program is crucial because its interpretation or misinterpretation by patients, physicians, and the general public can affect patient care, clinical practice, and research. This study evaluated nonresearch payments by industry to orthopedic surgeons. A retrospective cross-sectional review of the first wave of Physician Payments Sunshine Act data (August through December 2013) was performed to characterize industry payments to orthopedic surgeons by subspecialty, amount, type, origin, and geographic distribution. During this 5-month period, orthopedic surgeons (n=14,828) received $107,666,826, which included 3% of those listed in the Open Payments Program and 23% of the total amount paid. Of orthopedic surgeons who received payment, 45% received less than $100 and 1% received $100,000 or more. Median payment (interquartile range) was $119 ($34-$636), and mean payment was $7261±95,887. The largest payment to an individual orthopedic surgeon was $7,849,711. The 2 largest payment categories were royalty or license fees (68%) and consulting fees (13%). During the study period, orthopedic surgeons had substantial financial ties to industry. Of orthopedic surgeons who received payments, the largest proportion (45%) received less than $100 and only 1% received large payments (≥$100,000). The Open Payments Program offers insight into industry payments to orthopedic surgeons. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(6):e1058-e1062.].