Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Vasc Surg. 2013 Dec;58(6):1518-1524.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.06.064. Epub 2013 Sep 5.

Shared quality data are associated with increased protamine use and reduced bleeding complications after carotid endarterectomy in the Vascular Study Group of New England.

Author information

  • 1Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The goal of this study was to evaluate whether protamine usage after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) increased within the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) in response to studies indicating that protamine reduces bleeding complications associated with CEA without increasing the risk of stroke.

METHODS:

We reviewed 10,059 CEAs, excluding concomitant coronary bypass, performed within the VSGNE from January 2003 to July 2012. Protamine use and reoperation for bleeding were evaluated monthly using statistical process control. Twelve centers and 77 surgeons entering the VSGNE between 2003 and 2008 were classified as original participants, and 14 centers and 60 surgeons joining after May 2009 were considered new. Protamine use for surgeons was categorized as rare (<10%), selective (10%-80%), or routine (>80%). Outcome measures were in-hospital reoperation for bleeding, postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI), and stroke or death.

RESULTS:

Two significant increases occurred in protamine use for all VSGNE centers over time. From 2003 to 2007, the protamine rate remained stable at 43%. In 2008, protamine usage increased to 52% (P < .01), coincident with new centers joining the VSGNE. Protamine usage then increased to 62% in 2010 (P < .01), shortly after the presentations of the data showing a benefit of protamine. This effect was due to 10 surgeons in the original VSGNE centers who increased their usage of protamine: six surgeons from rare use to selective use and four surgeons to routine use. Reoperation for bleeding was reduced by 0.84% (relative risk reduction, 57.2%) in patients who received protamine (0.6% vs 1.44%; P < .001). There were no differences in POMI (1.1% vs 1.09%) or stroke or death (1.1% vs 1.03%) between protamine treated and untreated patients, respectively. Reoperation for bleeding was decreased for surgeons who used protamine routinely (0.5%; P < .001) compared with selective (1.4%) and rare users (1.5%) of protamine. There were no differences in POMI (0.9%, 1.2%, 1.1%; P = .720) and stroke or death rates (1.0%, 1.2%, 1.0%; P = .656) for rare, selective, and routine users of protamine.

CONCLUSIONS:

Protamine use increased over time by VSGNE surgeons, most significantly after the presentations of VSGNE-derived data showing the benefit of protamine, and was associated with a decrease in reoperation for bleeding. Improvements in processes of care and outcomes can be achieved in regional quality groups by sharing safety and efficacy data.

PMID:
24011737
PMCID:
PMC4279241
DOI:
10.1016/j.jvs.2013.06.064
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center