Dataset Information

Reoperation Rates and Costs of Radial Head Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Radial Head and Neck Fractures: A Retrospective Database Study.

ABSTRACT: Background: We conducted a retrospective study to compare reoperation/conversion rates and costs between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and radial head arthroplasty (RHA) in patients with radial head/neck fractures. Methods: We examined the Humana Orthopedic data sets using the PearlDiver Application from January 2007 to June 2016 to identify patients with radial head and neck fractures with and without a concurrent elbow dislocation. Time to revision surgery, odds ratios, and survival curves for reoperations/conversions were calculated comparing ORIF and RHA. Results: A total of 7520 patients were identified who had undergone either ORIF or RHA. Overall, ORIF patients were less likely to undergo a conversion procedure (2.76% vs 7.03%) but more likely to undergo any reoperation (21.36% vs 17.63%) with a higher average cost ($19 688.46 vs $11 626.64). Patients who underwent ORIF without a concurrent elbow dislocation were also less likely to undergo a conversion procedure (2.12% vs 7.24%) but more likely to undergo any reoperation (20.22% vs 16.99%) with a higher average cost ($19 420.21 vs $11 123.61). Patients who underwent ORIF with a concurrent elbow dislocation were more likely to undergo both a conversion procedure (15.86% vs 6.39%) and any reoperation (44.98% vs 19.63%) with a higher average cost per patient ($24 999.62 vs $13 192.00). The average time to reoperation/conversion surgery was less than a year for all patient groups. Conclusions: Overall reoperation rates are high in patients undergoing operative treatment of radial head and neck fractures. RHA is less expensive and has fewer reoperations/conversions in short-term follow-up when compared with ORIF in radial head/neck fracture dislocations of the elbow.

SUBMITTER: Reinhardt D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7818041 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are 2 mainstream treatments for displaced femoral neck fracture, including internal fixation and arthroplasty. However, there are still some controversial problems as to which treatment should be primarily chosen.MethodsThe relevant studies comparing arthroplasty with internal fixation were searched in the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Finally, 31 relevant randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. The quality of studies was evaluated and meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. We also assessed the heterogeneity among studies and publication bias via the I-squared index and forest plots.ResultsThere was no significant difference between arthroplasty and internal fixation groups in patient mortality at both short-term and long-term points. However, patients treated with arthroplasty showed significantly lowered risks of reoperation both at short-term (5.6% vs 31.5%; relative risks (RR) = 0.19; 95% CI, 0.13-0.28; P < .00001) and long-term follow-up (9.5% vs 45.9%; RR = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.17-0.33; P < .00001). Similarly, arthroplasty-treated patients demonstrated a significant decrease in the risk of postoperation complications at short-term (10.3% vs 34.4%; RR = 0.37, 95% CI, 0.24-0.57; P < .00001) and long-term follow-up (11.7% vs 42.5%; RR = 0.30, 95% CI, 0.16-0.57; P < .0002). Besides, patients in the arthroplasty group were associated with better alleviation of pain postoperation (18.3% vs 31.1%; RR = 0.50, 95% CI, 0.33-0.78; P = .002).In trial sequence analyses, all cumulative Z curves except that of mortality crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundaries and conventional boundaries, and required information size has been reached.ConclusionsArthroplasty leads to a lower rate of reoperation, a reduced risk of complications, and a better alleviation of postoperation pain both at short-term and long-term follow-up. Most importantly, and according to trial sequence analyses, more than enough evidence has been achieved that arthroplasty does show better outcomes than internal fixation in terms of reoperation rate, complications, and postoperation pain.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) is the treatment of choice for posttraumatic arthritis with failed internal fixation for hip fractures. However, the postoperative prognosis is not clear.Questions/purposesThe primary aim of the study is to report the postoperative outcome, prognosis, and complication rates of total hip arthroplasty in posttraumatic hip arthritis after failed internal fixation of fractures around the hip. The secondary aim of the study is to report results among different fracture types around the hip.Patients and methodsWe enrolled salvage THA patients after failed internal fixation of fractures around the hip and matched control patients undergoing primary THA for hip osteoarthritis. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare the postoperative outcomes, prognosis, and complication rates of salvage THA in posttraumatic hip arthritis after failed internal fixation of different fracture types around the hip.ResultsA total of 315 THAs (105 salvage THAs and 210 primary THAs) were analyzed. Patients with salvage THA had a longer operative time, lower postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) level, more Hb drop (2.2 ± 1.4 vs. 1.7 ± 1.2 gm/dl, p = 0.002), and delayed ambulation. The salvage THA group also had a higher dislocation rate within 2 months after salvage THA (9.5% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.002), reoperation rate (10.5% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.019, including debridement, open and closed reduction under sedation, revision surgery, surgical fixation for periprosthetic fractures), and revision rate (5.7% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.003) than patients undergoing primary THA. Patients who had failed fixation for acetabular fractures were younger and tended to recover well. Patients with previous intertrochanteric fracture had the longest operative time, more hip pain (83.8%, p = 0.022) and more complications.ConclusionSalvage THA in posttraumatic hip arthritis after failed internal fixation required a longer operative time and led to more blood loss and postoperative complications. The dislocation, reoperation, and revision rates after salvage THA were higher than those after primary THA. Patients with salvage THA after failed internal fixation for intertrochanteric fractures were the most susceptible to more complications compared to those with femoral neck fracture or acetabular fracture. Level of Evidence level III.

Project description:BackgroundSurgery for fixation of olecranon fractures is associated with reoperation, mostly for implant removal. A study of a large cohort of patients treated by many different surgeons allows us to determine if specific techniques or implants are associated with a higher rate of reoperation.Questions/purposesAfter open reduction and internal fixation of isolated olecranon fractures, what factors are associated with (1) reoperation and (2) implant removal?MethodsThree hundred ninety-two adult patients who had operative treatment of a displaced olecranon fracture not associated with other fractures, dislocation, or subluxation at two area hospitals between January 2002 and May 2014 were analyzed to determine factors associated with reoperation. One hundred thirty-eight (35%) patients had plate and screw fixation and 254 (65%) tension band wiring. Nearly 100% of patients with displaced olecranon fractures are currently treated operatively at our hospitals. All patients were followed for at least four months. Two hundred three of the 392 (52%) patients were followed for one year or more. Ninety-nine patients (25%) had a second operation, 92 (93%) at least in part for implant removal (12 for wire migration [3% of all fractures, 12% of reoperations]). We considered patient-related, fracture-related, and implant-related endpoints as possible factors associated with reoperation. With a total sample size of 99 reoperations, an α of 0.05, and an effect size of 0.3, we had 87% power.ResultsReoperation was less common in men (36 [36%], women: 63 [64%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.56; p < 0.001) and older patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.87; p < 0.001). Similarly, request for implant removal was less in men (33 [36%], women: 59 [64%], adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.56; p < 0.001) and older patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.87; p < 0.001).ConclusionsPatients who have operative fixation of a fracture of the olecranon can be counseled that most patients keep their implants, that only 3% experience implant migration, and that technical factors such as the type or configuration of an implant seem less important than personal factors in determining who requests a second surgery for implant removal.Level of evidenceLevel III, prognostic study.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the effects between computer-assisted and traditional cannulated screw internal fixation on treating femoral neck fracture.MethodsThe search was conducted in Embase, Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Database from the beginning to August 2020. RevMan5.4 software, which was provided by the International Cochrane Group, was used for the meta-analysis comparing the differences in operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, fluoroscopy frequency, fracture healing time, total drilling times, Harris score, fracture healing rate, and femoral head necrosis rate between computer-assisted and traditional methods groups.ResultsA total of 1028 patients were included in 16 studies. Primary outcome indicators: Compared with the traditional method group, the computer-assisted group had less operative time (2RCTs, P < 0.00001; 8 non-RCTs, P = 0.009; Overall, P < 0.00001), intraoperative bleeding (1 RCTs, P < 0.00001; 9non-RCTs, P < 0.00001; Overall, P < 0.00001), femoral head necrosis rate (1 RCT, P = 0.11;7 non-RCTs, P = 0.09; Overall, P = 0.02) and higher Harris scores (1 RCT, P < 0.0001; 9 non-RCTs, P = 0.0002; Overall, P < 0.0001), and there were no significant differences in fracture healing rate between the two groups (5 non-RCTs, P = 0.17). Secondary outcomes indicators: The computer-assisted group had a lower frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopy and total number of drills compared with the traditional method group, while there was no significant difference in fracture healing time.ConclusionCompared with the traditional hollow screw internal fixation on the treatment of femoral neck fracture, computer-assisted percutaneous cannulated screw fixation can shorten the operation time and improve the operation efficiency and reduce the X-ray injury of medical staff and help patients obtain a better prognosis. Therefore, computer-assisted percutaneous cannulated screw fixation is a better choice for the treatment of femoral neck fracture. Study registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42020214493.

Dataset Information

Reoperation Rates and Costs of Radial Head Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Radial Head and Neck Fractures: A Retrospective Database Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets