Next-Generation Sequencing vs Culture-Based Methods for Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty is challenging to diagnose. Compared with culture-based techniques, next-generation sequencing (NGS) is more sensitive for identifying organisms but is also less specific and more expensive. To date, there has been no study comparing the cost-effectiveness of these two methods to diagnose PJI after total knee arthroplasty.MethodsA Markov, state-transition model projecting lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was constructed to determine the cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate parameter assumptions.ResultsAt our base case values, culture was not determined to be cost-effective compared to NGS, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $422,784 per QALY. One-way sensitivity analyses found NGS to be the cost-effective choice above a pretest probability of 45.5% for PJI. In addition, NGS was cost-effective if its sensitivity was greater than 70.0% and its specificity greater than 94.1%. Two-way sensitivity analyses revealed that the pretest probability and test performance parameters (sensitivity and specificity) were the largest factors for identifying whether a particular strategy was cost-effective.ConclusionThe results of our model suggest that the cost-effectiveness of NGS to diagnose PJI depends primarily on the pretest probability of PJI and the performance characteristics of the NGS technology. Our results are consistent with the idea that NGS should be reserved for clinical contexts with a high pretest probability of PJI. Further study is required to determine the indications and subgroups for which NGS offers clinical benefit.     

The Cost-Effectiveness of Silver-Impregnated Occlusive Dressings for Infection Prevention After Total Joint Arthroplasty

BackgroundProsthetic joint infection (PJI) is a catastrophic complication after total joint arthroplasty that exacts a substantial economic burden on the health-care system. This study used break-even analysis to investigate whether the use of silver-impregnated occlusive dressings is a cost-effective measure for preventing PJI after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA).MethodsBaseline infection rates after TKA and THA, the cost of revision arthroplasty for PJI, and the cost of a silver-impregnated occlusive dressing were determined based on institutional data and the existing literature. A break-even analysis was then conducted to calculate the minimal absolute risk reduction needed for cost-effectiveness.ResultsThe use of silver-impregnated occlusive dressings would be economically viable at an infection rate of 1.10%, treatment costs of $25,692 for TKA PJI, and $31,753 for THA PJI and our institutional dressing price of $38.05 if it reduces infection rates after TKA by 0.15% (the number needed to treat [NNT] = 676) and THA by 0.12% (NNT = 835). The absolute risk reduction needed to maintain cost-effectiveness did not change with varying initial infection rates and remained less than 0.40% (NNT = 263) for infection treatment costs as low as $10,000 and less than 0.80% (NNT = 129) for dressing prices as high as $200.ConclusionThe use of silver-impregnated occlusive dressings is a cost-effective measure for infection prophylaxis after TKA and THA.     

Comparative outcomes and cost-utility following surgical treatment of focal lumbar spinal stenosis compared with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: part 2—estimated lifetime incremental cost-utility ratios

Background contextAlthough total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have been widely accepted as highly cost-effective procedures, spine surgery for the treatment of degenerative conditions does not share the same perception among stakeholders. In particular, the sustainability of the outcome and cost-effectiveness following lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) surgery compared with THA/TKA remain uncertain.PurposeThe purpose of the study was to estimate the lifetime incremental cost-utility ratios for decompression and decompression with fusion for focal LSS versus THA and TKA for osteoarthritis (OA) from the perspective of the provincial health insurance system (predominantly from the hospital perspective) based on long-term health status data at a median of 5 years after surgical intervention.Study design/settingAn incremental cost-utility analysis from a hospital perspective was based on a single-center, retrospective longitudinal matched cohort study of prospectively collected outcomes and retrospectively collected costs.Patient samplePatients who had undergone primary one- to two-level spinal decompression with or without fusion for focal LSS were compared with a matched cohort of patients who had undergone elective THA or TKA for primary OA.Outcome measuresOutcome measures included incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) ($/quality adjusted life year [QALY]) determined using perioperative costs (direct and indirect) and Short Form-6D (SF-6D) utility scores converted from the SF-36.MethodsPatient outcomes were collected using the SF-36 survey preoperatively and annually for a minimum of 5 years. Utility was modeled over the lifetime and QALYs were determined using the median 5-year health status data. The primary outcome measure, cost per QALY gained, was calculated by estimating the mean incremental lifetime costs and QALYs for each diagnosis group after discounting costs and QALYs at 3%. Sensitivity analyses adjusting for +25% primary and revision surgery cost, +25% revision rate, upper and lower confidence interval utility score, variable inpatient rehabilitation rate for THA/TKA, and discounting at 5% were conducted to determine factors affecting the value of each type of surgery.ResultsAt a median of 5 years (4–7 years), follow-up and revision surgery data was attained for 85%-FLSS, 80%-THA, and 75%-THA of the cohorts. The 5-year ICURs were $21,702/QALY for THA; $28,595/QALY for TKA; $12,271/QALY for spinal decompression; and $35,897/QALY for spinal decompression with fusion. The estimated lifetime ICURs using the median 5-year follow-up data were $5,682/QALY for THA; $6,489/QALY for TKA; $2,994/QALY for spinal decompression; and $10,806/QALY for spinal decompression with fusion. The overall spine (decompression alone and decompression and fusion) ICUR was $5,617/QALY. The estimated best- and worst-case lifetime ICURs varied from $1,126/QALY for the best-case (spinal decompression) to $39,323/QALY for the worst case (spinal decompression with fusion).ConclusionSurgical management of primary OA of the spine, hip, and knee results in durable cost-utility ratios that are well below accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness. Despite a significantly higher revision rate, the overall surgical management of FLSS for those who have failed medical management results in similar median 5-year and lifetime cost-utility compared with those of THA and TKA for the treatment of OA from the limited perspective of a public health insurance system.     

Preoperative Vitamin D Repletion in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Cost-Effectiveness Model

BackgroundRecent studies have identified vitamin D deficiency (serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] < 20 ng/L) as a potentially modifiable risk factor for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in arthroplasty. The purpose of this study is to determine whether implementation of preoperative 25(OH)D repletion is cost-effective for reducing PJI following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsA cost estimation predictive model was generated to determine the utility of both selective and nonselective 25(OH)D repletion in primary TKA to prevent PJI. Input data on the incidence of 25(OH)D deficiency, relative complication rates, and costs of serum 25(OH)D repletion and 2-stage revision for PJI were derived from previously published literature identified using systematic review and publicly available data from Medicare reimbursement schedules. Mean, lower, and upper bounds of 1-year cost savings were computed for nonselective and selective repletion relative to no repletion.ResultsSelective preoperative 25(OH)D screening and repletion were projected to result in $1,504,857 (range, $215,084-$4,256,388) in cost savings per 10,000 cases. Nonselective 25(OH)D repletion was projected to result in $1,906,077 (range, $616,304-$4,657,608) in cost savings per 10,000 cases. With univariate adjustment, nonselective repletion is projected to be cost-effective in scenarios where revision for PJI costs ≥$10,636, incidence of deficiency is ≥1.1%, and when repletion has a relative risk reduction ≥4.2%.ConclusionThis predictive model supports the potential role of 25(OH)D repletion as a cost-effective mechanism of reducing PJI risk in TKA. Given the low cost of 25(OH)D repletion relative to serum laboratory testing, nonselective repletion appears to be more cost-effective than selective repletion. Further prospective investigation to assess this modifiable risk factor is warranted.     

A cost-utility analysis of apalutamide for metastatic castrationsensitive prostate cancer

IntroductionEarlier application of oral androgen receptor-axis-targeted therapies in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) has established improvements in overall survival, as compared to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone. Recently, the use of apalutamide plus ADT has demonstrated improvement in mCSPC-related mortality vs. ADT alone, with an acceptable toxicity profile. However, the cost-effectiveness of this therapeutic option remains unknown.MethodsWe used a state-transition model with probabilistic analysis to compare apalutamide plus ADT, as compared to ADT alone, for mCSPC patients over a time horizon of 20 years. Primary outcomes included expected life-years (LY), quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), lifetime cost (2020 Canadian dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Parameter and model uncertainties were assessed through scenario analyses. Health outcomes and cost were discounted at 1.5%, as per Canadian guidelines.ResultsFor the base-case analysis, expected LY for ADT and apalutamide plus ADT were 4.11 and 5.56, respectively (incremental LY 1.45). Expected QALYs were 3.51 for ADT and 4.84 for apalutamide plus ADT (incremental QALYs 1.33); expected lifetime cost was $36 582 and $255 633, respectively (incremental cost $219 051). ICER for apalutamide plus ADT, as compared to ADT alone, was $164 700/QALY. Through scenario analysis, price reductions ≥50% were required for apalutamide in combination with ADT to be considered cost-effective, at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000/QALY.ConclusionsApalutamide plus ADT is unlikely to be cost-effective from the Canadian healthcare perspective unless there are substantial reductions in the price of apalutamide treatment.     

Cost-Effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Markov Decision Analysis

BackgroundRobot-assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) may improve clinical outcomes for patients who have end-stage osteoarthritis of the knee. However, the costs of rTKA are high, and there is a paucity of data evaluating the cost-effectiveness of rTKA. We aimed to analyze the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of rTKA relative to manual TKA.MethodsA Markov decision analysis was performed using known parameters for costs, outcomes, implant survivorships, and mortalities. The cost-effectiveness of rTKA relative to manual TKA was assessed for end-stage knee osteoarthritis patients who had a mean age of 65 years (range, 27 to 94 years). The rTKA costs were calculated for a pay-per-use contract robot.ResultsUsing the Markov Model with an annual case volume of 500 patients and a mean age of 65 years, the overall health gain per patient was 13.34 QALYs after rTKA and 13.31 QALYs after manual TKA. This resulted in an overall gain in QALYs of 0.03 for each patient undergoing an rTKA compared with manual TKA and an incremental cost of $128,526 Singapore Dollars per QALY.ConclusionRobotic TKA is not a cost-effective alternative to conventional TKA using a pay-per-use contract robot.     

Preoperative Allergy Testing for Patients Reporting Penicillin and Cephalosporin Allergies is Cost-Effective in Preventing Infection after Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundRoutine preoperative allergy testing in patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies increases the number able to receive cefazolin, which should reduce the risk of infection after total knee and hip arthroplasty (TKA/THA), but it remains unclear whether this practice is cost-effective. Using a break-even analysis, we calculated the cost-effectiveness of routine preoperative allergy testing for infection prevention in total joint arthroplasty patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies.MethodsThe cost of a penicillin allergy evaluation, the cost of revision arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection (PJI), and baseline rates of PJI in patients receiving a noncefazolin antibiotic in the perioperative period were derived from existing literature. A break-even economic model using these variables was constructed to calculate the absolute risk reduction (ARR) in infection rate needed for preoperative allergy testing to be cost-effective. The number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated from the ARR.ResultsPreoperative allergy testing before TKA and THA in patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies was cost-effective if the initial infection rate decreased by an ARR of 0.810% (NNT = 123) and 0.655% (NNT = 153) for TKA and THA, respectively. Cost-effectiveness was maintained with varying allergy consultation costs, infection rates, and costs associated with PJI treatment.ConclusionRoutine preoperative allergy testing and clearance are cost-effective infection prevention strategies among patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies in the setting of elective joint arthroplasty. Widespread adoption of this practice may considerably reduce the economic and societal burden associated with prosthetic infections.     

The Cost-Effectiveness of Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Infection Prevention After Total Joint Arthroplasty in High-Risk Patients

BackgroundExtended oral antibiotic prophylaxis may decrease rates of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in patients at high risk for infection. However, the cost-effectiveness of this practice is not clear. In this study, we used a break-even economic model to determine the cost-effectiveness of routine extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis for PJI prevention in high-risk TJA patients.MethodsBaseline PJI rates in high-risk patients, the cost of revision arthroplasty for PJI, and the costs of extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis regimens were obtained from the literature and institutional purchasing records. These variables were incorporated in a break-even economic model to calculate the absolute risk reduction (ARR) in infection rate necessary for extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis to be cost-effective. ARR was used to determine the number needed to treat (NNT).ResultsExtended oral antibiotic prophylaxis with Cefadroxil in patients at high risk for PJI was cost-effective at an ARR in baseline infection rate of 0.187% (NNT = 535) and 0.151% (NNT = 662) for TKA and THA, respectively. Cost-effectiveness was preserved with varying costs of antibiotic regimens, PJI treatment costs, and infection rates.ConclusionThe use of extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis may reduce PJI rates in patients at high risk for infection following TJA and appears to be cost-effective. However, the current evidence supporting this practice is limited in quality. The use of extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis should be weighed against the possible development of future antimicrobial resistance, which may change the value proposition.     

The Cost-Effectiveness of Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients 80 Years of Age and Older

Background

This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients 80 years old.

The Economics of Antibiotic Cement in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Added Cost with No Reduction in Infection Rates

BackgroundTo reduce the substantial clinical and financial burden of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), some surgeons advocate for the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), although its effectiveness continues to be debated in the literature. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the routine use of ALBC is cost-effective in reducing PJI after primary TKA.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of patients undergoing cemented primary TKA at two hospitals within our institution from 2015 to 2017. We compared demographics, comorbidities, costs, and PJI rates between patients receiving ALBC and plain cement. We performed a multivariate regression analysis to determine the independent effect of ALBC on PJI rate. We calculated readmission costs for PJI and reduction in PJI needed to justify the added cost of ALBC.ResultsOf 2511 patients, 1077 underwent TKA with ALBC (43%), with no difference in PJI rates (0.56% vs 0.14%, P = .0662) or complications (1.2% vs 1.6%, P = .3968) but higher cement costs ($416 vs $117, P < .0001) and overall procedure costs ($6445 vs $5.968, P < .0001). ALBC had no effect on infection rate (P = .0894). Patients readmitted with PJI had higher overall 90-day episode-of-care claims costs ($49,341 vs $19,032, P < .001). To justify additional costs, ALBC would need to prevent infection in one of every 101 patients.ConclusionRoutine use of ALBC in primary TKA is not cost-effective, adding $299 to the cost of episode of care without a reduction in PJI rate. Further study is needed to determine whether select use of ALBC would be justified in high-risk patients.     

Cost-Effectiveness of Preoperative Spinal Imaging Before Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe risk of instability, dislocation, and revision following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increased in patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility. Seated and standing lateral lumbar spine imaging can identify patients with stiff/hypermobile spine (SHS) to guide interventions such as changes in acetabular cup placement or use of a dual-mobility hip construct aimed at reducing dislocation risk.MethodsA Markov decision model was created to compare routine preoperative spinal imaging (PSI) to no screening in patients with and without SHS. Screened patients with SHS were assumed to receive dual-mobility hardware while those without SHS and nonscreened patients were assumed to receive conventional THA. Cost-effectiveness was determined by estimating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Effectiveness measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with $100,000 per additional QALY as the threshold for cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the robustness of the base-case result.ResultsThe screening strategy with PSI had a lifetime cost of $12,515 and QALY gains of 16.91 compared with no-screening ($13,331 and 16.77). The PSI strategy reached cost-effectiveness at 5 years and was dominant (ie, less costly and more effective) at 11 years following THA. In sensitivity analyses, PSI remained the dominant strategy if prevalence of SHS was >1.9%, the cost of PSI was <$925, and the cost of dual-mobility hardware exceeded the cost of conventional hardware by <$2850.ConclusionScreening patients for SHS prior to THA with PSI is both less costly and more effective and should be considered as part of standard presurgical workup.     

Is 2-Stage Septic Revision Worth the Money? A Cost-Utility Analysis of a 1-Stage Versus 2-Stage Septic Revision of Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundTwo-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the gold standard for the management of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee, but several studies have demonstrated that 1-stage exchange is as effective as 2-stage exchange. This study aimed to support decision-making via an economic evaluation of 1-stage compared to 2-stage exchange for total knee arthroplasty septic revision in patients who did not have compelling indication PJI (ie, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, multiorganism, systemic sepsis, comorbidities, culture negative, resistant organism, and immunocompromised) to undergo a 2-stage exchange.MethodsA cost-utility analysis was performed using a Markov cohort model from the health care provider perspective using Australia data. One-stage septic knee revisions were compared with 2-stage exchange procedures for chronic PJI using a patient-lifetime horizon. Health outcomes were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), whereas costs were presented in 2020 Australian dollars. Sensitivity analyses, population expected values of perfect information, and the perfect information for parameters (EVPPI) were assessed to estimate the opportunity costs surrounding the decision made at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2-stage exchange compared with 1-stage exchange was $231,000 per QALY, with 98.5% of the probabilistic sensitivity simulations above the willingness-to-pay threshold. The population expected value of perfect information was $882,000, whereas the expected value of perfect information for parameters for the “cost parameters” was $207,000.ConclusionThe adoption of 1-stage septic knee revision is the optimal choice for patients who have a PJI and who do not have a compelling need for a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty. One-stage exchange for PJI should be advocated in patients who meet the eligibility criteria.     

Topical Vancomycin Powder and Dilute Povidone-Iodine Lavage Reduce the Rate of Early Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundVancomycin powder and dilute povidone-iodine lavage (VIP) was introduced to reduce the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in high-risk total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. We hypothesize that VIP can reduce the incidence of early PJI in all primary TKA patients, regardless of preoperative risk.MethodsAn infection database of primary TKAs performed before a VIP protocol was implemented (January 2012-December 2013), during a time when only high-risk TKAs received VIP (January 2014-December 2015), and when all TKAs received VIP (January 2016-September 2019) at an urban, university-affiliated, not-for-profit orthopedic hospital was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with PJI. Criteria used for diagnosis of PJI were the National Healthcare Safety Network and Musculoskeletal Infection Society guidelines.ResultsVIP reduced early primary TKA PJI incidence in both the high-risk and all-risk cohorts compared with the pre-VIP cohort by 44.6% and 56.4%, respectively (1.01% vs 0.56% vs 0.44%, P = .0088). In addition, after introducing VIP to all-risk TKA patients, compared with high-risk TKA patients, the relative risk of PJI dropped an additional 21.4%, but this finding did not reach statistical significance (0.56% vs 0.44%, P = .4212). There were no demographic differences between the 3 VIP PJI cohorts.ConclusionVIP is associated with a reduced early PJI incidence after primary TKA, regardless of preoperative risk. With the literature supporting its safety and cost-effectiveness, VIP is a value-based intervention, but given the nature of this historical cohort study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial is underway to definitively confirm its efficacy.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding, and nonoperative weight loss interventions

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are the two most commonly performed bariatric procedures. Although both procedures likely reduce healthcare expenditures related to the resolution of co-morbid conditions, they have different rates of perioperative risks and different rates of associated weight loss. We designed a model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of these procedures compared with nonoperative weight loss interventions and with each other. METHODS: We used a deterministic, payer-perspective model comparing the lifetime expected costs and outcomes of LAGB, LRYGB, and nonoperative treatment. The major endpoints were survival, health-related quality of life, and weight loss. Life expectancy and lifetime medical costs were calculated across age, gender, and body mass index (BMI) strata using previously published data. RESULTS: For both men and women, LRYGB and LAGB were cost-effective at <$25,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) even when evaluating the full range of baseline BMI and estimates of adverse outcomes, weight loss, and costs. For base-case scenarios in men (age 35 y, BMI 40 kg/m(2)), the incremental cost-effectiveness was $11,604/QALY for LAGB compared with $18,543/QALY for LRYGB. For base-case scenarios in women (age 35 y, BMI 40 kg/m(2)), the incremental cost-effectiveness was $8878/QALY for LAGB compared with $14,680/QALY for LRYGB. CONCLUSION: The modeled cost-effectiveness analysis showed that both operative interventions for morbid obesity, LAGB and RYGB, were cost-effective at <$25,000 and that LAGB was more cost-effective than RYGB for all base-case scenarios.     

The cost-effectiveness of multi-component interventions to prevent delirium in older people undergoing surgical repair of hip fracture

This article summarizes the detailed cost-effectiveness analysis of delirium prevention interventions in people undergoing surgical repair of hip fracture. We compared a multi-component delirium prevention intervention with usual care using a model based on a decision tree analysis. The model was used to estimate the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB). The robustness of the cost-effectiveness result was explored using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The multi-component prevention intervention was cost-effective when compared to usual care. It was associated with an INMB of £8,180 using a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY. It remained cost-effective in the majority of the deterministic sensitivity analyses and was cost-effective in 96.4 % of the simulations carried out in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. We have demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of a multi-component delirium prevention intervention that targets modifiable risk factors for delirium in older people undergoing surgical repair of hip fracture. It is an attractive intervention for practitioners and health care policy makers as they address the double burden of hip fracture and delirium.     

Cost-utility analysis of emergency department thoracotomy for trauma victims

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) performed on both penetrating and blunt trauma victims, using both published survival and outcome data and previously unaccounted for data on the cost of occupational exposure. METHODS: Cost-utility analysis was performed using decision-analytic models constructed for both penetrating and blunt trauma scenarios. Survival and impairment data, the rates and costs of occupational exposure, and the utilities of neurologic impairment and provider seroconversion were all based on published literature. Costs of EDT were estimated using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from the Health Care Utilization Project database. One-way sensitivity analyses on input parameters and probabilistic sensitivity analyses using Monte Carlo simulations were performed. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EDT for penetrating trauma was $16,125 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), and less than $50,000 per QALY with a 93.4% probability. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for blunt trauma was $163,136 per QALY, and less than $50,000 per QALY with a 37% probability. Neither model was sensitive to provider exposure. The penetrating model was insensitive to the probability of neurologically intact survival, the utility adjustment, procedure costs, and long-term care. The blunt model was sensitive to the probabilities of survival and of neurologic impairment. CONCLUSIONS: EDT is cost-effective for penetrating trauma, and not cost-effective for blunt trauma given current rates of survival and impairment. Occupational exposure does not significantly impact the cost-effectiveness of the procedure.     

Incidence and Predictors of Prosthetic Joint Infection Following Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A 15-Year Population-Based Cohort Study

BackgroundOne of the most devastating complications of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Although many complications associated with TKA have decreased over time, the trends associated with PJI are less clear. Thus, the purpose of this study is to determine the incidence and risk factors for PJI after primary TKA.MethodsWe performed a population-based cohort study using linked administrative databases in Ontario, Canada. We used a Cox proportional hazards model to analyze the effect of surgical factors and patient factors on the risk of developing PJI.ResultsIn total, 129,613 patients aged 50+ received a primary TKA for osteoarthritis from 2002 to 2016 in Ontario, Canada. In total, 1.41% of patients underwent revision surgery for PJI. When accounting for censoring, the cumulative incidence for PJI was 0.51% (95% confidence interval 0.46-0.55) at 1 year, 1.12% (1.05-1.18) at 5 years, 1.49% (1.41-1.57) at 10 years, and 1.65% (1.55-1.75) at 15 years. The multivariable model revealed that male gender, younger age, type II diabetes, post-traumatic arthritis, patellar resurfacing, and discharge to convalescent care were associated with increased risk of PJI.ConclusionThe risk of PJI following TKA has decreased in small but steady increments over the past 15 years. Most PJIs are diagnosed within the first 2 years postoperatively, though a small group do continue to occur after 10 years. Overall, while the incidence of PJI has decreased slightly over the past 15 years, it remains among the most concerning complications of TKA and continued efforts aimed at further reducing its occurrence are needed.     

Routine Patellar Resurfacing During Total Knee Arthroplasty Is Not Cost-Effective in Patients Without Patellar Arthritis

BackgroundCurrently, the decision to resurface the patella is often made irrespective of the presence of patellar arthritis. The purpose of this study is to utilize the existing literature to assess cost-utility of routinely vs selectively resurfacing the patella.MethodsProspective randomized studies of patella resurfacing vs non-resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were identified through literature review. Data from these studies represented probabilities of varied outcomes following TKA dependent upon patella resurfacing. Using previously validated utility scores from the McKnee modified Health Utilities Index, endpoint utility values were provided for each potential outcome.ResultsLiterature review yielded a total of 14 studies with 3,562 patients receiving 3,823 TKAs, of which 1,873 (49.0%) patellae were resurfaced. Persistent postoperative anterior knee pain occurred in 20.9% vs 13.2% (P < .001) and patella reoperation was performed in 3.7% vs 1.6% (P < .001) of unresurfaced and resurfaced patella, respectively. In studies excluding those with arthritic patellae, the incidence of anterior knee pain was equivalent between groups and reoperation decreased to 1.2% vs 0% (P = .06). Patella resurfacing provided marginally improved quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) for both selective and indiscriminate patella resurfacing. When including all studies, the incremental cost per QALY was $3,032. However, when analyzing only those studies with nonarthritic patellae, the incremental cost per QALY to resurface the patella increased to $183,584.ConclusionPatellar resurfacing remains a controversial issue in TKA. Utilizing data from new prospective randomized studies, this analysis finds that routinely resurfacing arthritis-free patellae in TKA are not cost-effective.     

How Are We Measuring Cost-Effectiveness in Total Joint Arthroplasty Studies? Systematic Review of the Literature

BackgroundAs volumes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continue to rise, it is important to understand their economic impact. No systematic review on cost-effectiveness of THA/TKA has been performed since 2016 despite recent changes in the healthcare environment. The purpose of the study is to provide a contemporary analysis of the cost-effectiveness of total joint arthroplasty and the use of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).MethodsA systematic review was performed from 2005 to 2020. Online databases (OVID Medline, PubMed, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, Google Scholar, Elton B. Stephens Co) were queried to identify economic analyses that evaluated the cost-effectiveness of THA/TKA.ResultsIn total, 38 studies met the screening criteria. Study designs were primarily Markov models (68%), cohort studies (16%), and randomized trials (8%). Most studies adopted either a societal perspective (45%) or a health system perspective (39%). Analysis revealed that THA/TKA was strongly cost-effective compared to nonsurgical treatment. THA/TKA procedures that were not delayed were more cost-effective than delayed intervention. The majority of studies used QALYs as the primary quality metric (82%); in all these studies there was a significant improvement in QALYs gained.ConclusionGiven the high economic impact of arthroplasty, ongoing assessment of cost-effectiveness is needed. Twenty-four percent of studies included in this systematic review were published in the last 4 years of this 15-year study period, highlighting the need for continuous assessment of aggregate data. Future studies should incorporate the cost-effectiveness of THA and TKA with respect to the work-value provided by surgeon providers to support health policy and reimbursement.     

Projected Economic Burden of Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip and Knee in the United States

BackgroundIn addition to the significant morbidity and mortality associated with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), the cost of treating PJI is substantial. Prior high-quality national estimates of the economic burden of PJI utilize data up to 2009 to project PJI growth in the United States through 2020. Now in the year 2020, it is appropriate to evaluate these past projections and incorporate the latest available data to better understand the current scale and burden of PJI in the United States.MethodsThe Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2002-2017) was used to identify rates and associated inpatient costs for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) and PJI-related revision TKA and THA. Poisson regression was utilized to model past growth and project future rates and cost of PJI of the hip and knee.ResultsUsing the most recent data, the combined annual hospital costs related to PJI of the hip and knee were estimated to be $1.85 billion by 2030. This includes $753.4 million for THA PJI and $1.1 billion for TKA PJI, in that year. Increases in PJI costs are mainly attributable to increases in volume. Although the growth in incidence of primary THA and TKA has slowed in recent years, the incidence of PJI and the cost per case of PJI remained relatively constant from 2002 to 2017.DiscussionUnderstanding the current and potential future financial burden of PJI for surgeons, patients, and healthcare systems is essential. There is an urgent need for efficacious preventive strategies in reducing rates of PJI after THA and TKA.