The Hidden Cost of Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Roof MA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9249566 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe increasing incidence of primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has led to an increase in both the incidence and the cost burden of revision TKA procedures. This study aimed to review the literature on the cost of revision TKA for septic and aseptic causes and to identify the major cost components contributing to the cost burden.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE (OvidSp), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EconLit, and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies. Selection, data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias and cost transparency within the studies were conducted by two independent reviewers, after which the cost data were analysed narratively for 1- or 2-stage septic revision without re-revision; 2-stage septic revision with re-revision; and aseptic revision with and without re-revision, respectively. The major cost components identified in the respective studies were also reported.ResultsThe direct medical cost from the healthcare provider perspective for high-income countries for 2-stage septic revision with re-revision ranged from US$66,629 to US$81,938, which can be about 2.5 times the cost of 1- or 2-stage septic revision without re-revision, (range: US$24,027 - US$38,109), which can be about double the cost of aseptic revision without re-revision (range: US$13,910 - US$29,213). The major cost components were the perioperative cost (33%), prosthesis cost (28%), and hospital ward stay cost (22%).ConclusionsSeptic TKA revision with re-revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) increases the cost burden of revision TKA by 4 times when compared to aseptic single-stage revision and by 2.5 times when compared to septic TKA revision that does not undergo re-revision. Cost reductions can be achieved by reducing the number of primary TKA that develop PJI, avoidance of re-revisions for PJI, and reduction in the length of stay after revision.Trial registrationPROSPERO; CRD42020171988 .
| S-EPMC8371784 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) is a validated risk stratification model referring to the cumulative deficits model of frailty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the HFRS as a predictor of 90-day readmission and complications after revision total hip (rTHA) and knee (rTKA) arthroplasty.MethodsIn a retrospective analysis of 565 patients who had undergone rTHA or rTKA between 2011 and 2019, the HFRS was calculated for each patient. Rates of adverse events were compared between patients with low and intermediate or high frailty risk. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between the HFRS and post-operative adverse events.ResultsPatients with intermediate or high frailty risk showed higher rates of readmission (30days: 23.8% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.006; 90days: 26.2% vs. 13.0%, p < 0.018), surgical complications (28.6% vs. 7.8%, p < 0.001), medical complications (11.9% vs. 1.0%, p < 0.001), other complications (28.6% vs. 2.3%, p < 0.001), Clavien-Dindo grade IV complications (14.3% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.009), and transfusion (33.3% vs. 6.1%, p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed a high HFRS as independent risk factor for surgical complications (OR = 3.45, 95% CI 1.45-8.18, p = 0.005), medical complications (OR = 7.29, 95% CI 1.72-30.97, p = 0.007), and other complications (OR = 14.15, 95% CI 5.16-38.77, p < 0.001).ConclusionThe HFRS predicts adverse events after rTHA and rTKA. As it derives from routinely collected data, the HFRS could be implemented automated in hospital information systems to facilitate identification of at-risk patients.
| S-EPMC8560670 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Septic loosening of total hip and knee endoprostheses gains an increasing proportion of revision arthroplasties. Operative revisions of infected endoprostheses are mentally and physically wearing for the patient, challenging for the surgeon and a significant economic burden for healthcare systems. In cases of early infection within the first three weeks after implantation a one-stage revision with leaving the implant in place is widely accepted. The recommendations for the management of late infections vary by far. One-stage revisions as well as two-stage or multiple revision schedules have been reported to be successful in over 90% of all cases for certain patient collectives. But implant associated infection still remains a severe complication. Moreover, the management of late endoprosthetic infection requires specific logistics, sufficient and standardized treatment protocol, qualified manpower as well as an efficient quality management. With regard to the literature and experience of specialized orthopaedic surgeons from several university and regional hospitals we modified a commonly used treatment protocol for two-stage revision of infected total hip and knee endoprostheses. In addition to the achievement of maximum survival rate of the revision implants an optimisation of the functional outcome of the affected artificial joint is aimed for.
| S-EPMC3252662 | biostudies-other
Project description:Massive allograft can be a useful option in revision total joint arthroplasty for treatment of significant bone loss. In rare cases, revision hip and knee arthroplasty procedures can be performed simultaneously using massive allograft-prosthetic composites. We present an 18 year follow up of a patient who received a simultaneous revision hip and knee total femoral allograft and discuss recent literature as it relates to this case.
| S-EPMC4956687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Revision total hip arthroplasty presents many challenges in regards to reconstructing or managing large amounts of bone loss and soft-tissue damage. Modern revision components, as well as techniques, have helped to address these challenges; however, the goal of any surgery is to provide the least amount of surgery with the most successful outcome. This case highlights a 74-year-old man with a Tronzo total hip arthroplasty placed over 50 years prior. He presented with subjective hip instability and radiographs demonstrating disassociation of the modular component. In an attempt to avoid more extensive and costly surgery, a custom-made all-polyethylene femoral head was used. This case illustrates the revision of likely one of the few Tronzo total hips remaining and the utility of obtaining a compassionate-use clearance from the Food and Drug Administration to create a custom piece, to minimize potential morbidity and mortality from extensive hip revision surgery.
| S-EPMC7225601 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cement removal during hip or knee arthroplasty revision surgery is technically demanding and prone to severe complications such as periprosthetic fractures, incomplete cement removal, or perforations. Several alternative techniques have been developed to enable complete, accurate, and safe removal of cement from bone, including osteotomies and cortical windows, endoscopic instruments, ultrasound devices, lithotripsy, and laser-assisted removal. We describe a cement-on-cement technique with a sterile, single-use tool for cement removal. The cement is removed piece by piece using a specifically designed device, without osteotomies or cortical windows.
| S-EPMC8217307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNational projections of future joint arthroplasties are useful in understanding the changing burden of surgery and related outcomes on the health system. The aim of this study is to update the literature by producing Medicare projections for revision total joint arthroplasty procedures from 2040 through 2060.MethodsThe study uses 2000-2019 data from the CMS Medicare Part-B National Summary and combines procedure counts using CPT codes for revision total joint arthroplasty procedures. In 2019, revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) procedures totaled 53,217 and 30,541, respectively, forming a baseline from which we generated point forecasts between 2020 and 2060 and 95% forecast intervals (FI).ResultsOn average, the model projects an annual growth rate of 1.77% for rTHAs and 4.67% for rTKAs. By 2040, rTHAs were projected to be 43,514 (95% FI = 37,429-50,589) and rTKAs were projected to be 115,147 (95% FI = 105,640-125,510). By 2060, rTHAs was projected to be 61,764 (95% FI = 49,927-76,408) and rTKAs were projected to be 286,740 (95% FI = 253,882-323,852).ConclusionsBased on 2019 total volume counts, the log-linear exponential model forecasts an increase in rTHA procedures of 42% by 2040 and 101% by 2060. Similarly, the estimated increase for rTKA is projected to be 149% by 2040 and 520% by 2060. An accurate projection of future revision procedure demands is important to understand future healthcare utilization and surgeon demand. This finding is only applicable to the Medicare population and demands further analysis for other population groups.
| S-EPMC10244911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In revision total knee arthroplasty, joint kinematics must be maintained amid bone and ligamentous insufficiency. Current modular designs address defects while allowing for intraoperative prosthesis customization through a variety of stem extensions and constraints. Additional constraint improves knee stability while increasing stress at the implant-host interface and modular junction of the implant. This renders the prosthetic stem-condyle junction more prone to fatigue failure. We report 2 cases of prosthetic stem-condyle junction failure in in a varus-valgus constrained revision total knee arthroplasty.
| S-EPMC8167321 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery pathways following total hip and knee arthroplasties. Secondary objectives were to report on quality of studies and identify research gaps for future work. DESIGN:Systematic review of cost-utility analyses. DATA SOURCES:Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database and EconLit, January 2000 to August 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:English-language peer-reviewed cost-utility analyses of enhanced recovery pathways, or components of one, compared with usual care, in patients having total hip or knee arthroplasties for osteoarthritis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Data extracted by three reviewers with disagreements resolved by a fourth. Study quality assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list, the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and Assessment of the Validation Status of Health-Economic decision models tools; for trial-based studies the Cochrane Collaboration's tool to assess risk of bias. No quantitative synthesis was undertaken. RESULTS:We identified 17 studies: five trial-based and 12 model-based studies. Two analyses evaluated entire enhanced recovery pathways and reported them to be cost-effective compared with usual care. Ten pathway components were more effective and cost-saving compared with usual care, three were cost-effective, and two were not cost-effective. We had concerns around risk of bias for all included studies, particularly regarding the short time horizon of the trials and lack of reporting of model validation. CONCLUSIONS:Consistent results supported enhanced recovery pathways as a whole, prophylactic systemic antibiotics, antibiotic-impregnated cement and conventional ventilation for infection prevention. No other interventions were subject of more than one study. We found ample scope for future cost-effectiveness studies, particularly analyses of entire recovery pathways and comparison of incremental changes within pathways. A key limitation is that standard practices have changed over the period covered by the included studies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017059473.
| S-EPMC7044879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Advances in perioperative care have enabled early discharge and outpatient primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, the safety of early discharge after revision TJA (rTJA) remains unknown and the COVID-19 pandemic will force decreased hospitalization. This study compared 90-day outcomes in patients undergoing aseptic rTJA discharged the same or next day (early) to those discharged 2 or 3 days postoperatively (later).Methods: In total, 530 aseptic rTJAs performed at a single tertiary care referral center (December 5, 2011 to December 30, 2019) were identified. Early and later discharge patients were matched as closely as possible on procedure type, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, age, and body mass index. All patients were optimized using modern perioperative protocols. The rate of 90-day emergency department (ED) visits and hospital admissions was compared between groups.Results: In total, 183 early discharge rTJAs (54 hips, 129 knees) in 178 patients were matched to 183 later discharge rTJAs (71 hips, 112 knees) in 165 patients. Sixty-two percent of the sample was female, with an overall average age and body mass index of 63 ± 9.9 (range: 18-92) years and 32 ± 6.9 (range: 18-58) kg/m2. There was no statistical difference in 90-day ED visit rates between early (6/178, 3.4%) and later (11/165, 6.7%) discharge patients (P = .214). Ninety-day hospital admission rates for early (7/178, 3.9%) and later (4/165, 2.4%) discharges did not differ (P = .545).Conclusion: Using modern perioperative protocols with appropriate patient selection, early discharge following aseptic rTJA does not increase 90-day readmissions or ED visits. As hospital inpatient capacity remains limited due to COVID-19, select rTJA patients may safely discharge home the same or next day to preserve hospital beds and resources for more critical illness.
| S-EPMC7391218 | biostudies-literature