What is the Level of Evidence Substantiating Commercial Payers’ Coverage Policies for Total Joint Arthroplasty?

BackgroundThe prevalence of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in the United States has drawn the attention of health care stakeholders. The payers have also used a variety of strategies to regulate the medical necessity of these procedures. The purpose of this study was to examine the level of evidence of the coverage policies being used by commercial payers in the United States.MethodsThe references of the coverage policies of four commercial insurance companies were reviewed for type of document, level of evidence, applicability to a TJA population, and success of nonoperative treatment in patients with severe degenerative joint disease.Results282 documents were reviewed. 45.8% were primary journal articles, 14.2% were level I or II, 41.2% were applicable to patients who were candidates for TJA, and 9.9% discussed the success of nonoperative treatment in patients who would be candidates for TJA.ConclusionMost of the references cited by commercial payers are of a lower level of scientific evidence and not applicable to patients considered to be candidates for TJA. This is relatively uniform across the reviewed payers. The dearth of high-quality literature cited by commercial payers reflects the lack of evidence and difficulty in conducting high level studies on the outcomes of nonoperative versus operative treatment for patients with severe, symptomatic osteoarthritis. Patients, surgeons, and payers would all benefit from such studies and we encourage professional societies to strive toward that end through multicenter collaboration.     

Patients Receiving a Primary Unicompartmental Knee Replacement Have a Higher Risk of Revision but a Lower Risk of Mortality Than Predicted Had They Received a Total Knee Replacement: Data From the National Joint Registry for England,Wales, Northern Ireland,and the Isle of Man

BackgroundTo determine unicompartmental (UKR) and total knee replacement (TKR) revision rates, compare UKR revision rates with what they would have been had they received TKR instead, and assess subsequent re-revision and 90-day mortality rates.MethodsUsing National Joint Registry data, we estimated UKR and TKR revision and mortality rates. Flexible parametric survival modeling (FPM) was used to model failure in TKR and make estimates for UKR. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to compare cumulative re-revision for revised UKRs and TKRs.ResultsTen-year UKR revision rates were 2.5 times higher than expected from TKR, equivalent to 70 excess revisions/1000 cases within 10 years (5861 excess revisions in this cohort). Revision rates were 2.5 times higher for the highest quartile volume UKR surgeons compared to the same quartile for TKR and 3.9 times higher for the lowest quartiles respectively. Re-revision rates of revised TKRs (10 years = 17.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.4-18.7) were similar to revised UKRs (15.2%, 95% CI 13.4-17.1) and higher than revision rates following primary TKR (3.3%, 95% CI 3.1-3.5). Ninety-day mortality rates were lower after UKR compared with TKR (0.08% vs 0.33%) and lower than predicted had UKR patients received a TKR (0.18%), equivalent to 1 fewer death per 1000 cases.ConclusionUKR revision rates were substantially higher than TKR even when demographics and caseload differences were accounted for; however, fewer deaths occur after UKR. This should be considered when forming treatment guidelines and commissioning services. Re-revision rates were similar between revised UKRs and TKRs, but considerably higher than for primary TKR, therefore UKR cannot be considered an intermediate procedure.     

Cornelia de Lange syndrome and congenital diaphragmatic hernia

PurposeThere is a known association between Cornelia de Lange syndrome (CdLS) and congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH), with CDH being the cause of death in 5%–20% of CdLS cases. We aimed to identify and describe patients with CDLS and CDH. We hypothesized that CdLS would be associated with high-risk CDH and poor outcomes.MethodsCDH Study Group patients from 1995 to 2019 were included. Those with CdLS were reviewed retrospectively. Rates of repair and outcomes were compared between patients with and without CdLS.ResultsWe identified 9,251 CDH patients. Of those, 21 had confirmed CdLS. CdLS patients had a lower birth weight (2.2 ± 0.57 kg) than non-CdLS patients (2.9 ± 0.64 kg) (p < 0.001). 5-min Apgar scores were lower in CdLS patients (6, 4–7) than non-CdLS patients (7, 5–8) (p = 0.014). Only 33% of CdLS patients underwent diaphragmatic repair compared to 84.2% of non-CdLS patients (p < 0.001). Mortality was 76% for CdLS patients compared with 29% for non-CdLS patients (p < 0.001). Of the 7 CdLS patients who underwent repair, 5 survived to hospital discharge.ConclusionsInfants with CdLS and CDH have a poor prognosis. However, CdLS patients who undergo repair can survive to discharge; therefore, the concomitant diagnosis of CdLS and CDH is not necessarily a contraindication to repair. Early recognition of these anomalies can assist with counseling and prognostication.Type of studyRetrospective comparative studyLevel of evidenceIII     

Despite Equivalent Outcomes,Men Receive Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Less Often Than Women for Lymph Node-Positive Breast Cancer

Annals of Surgical Oncology -     

A National Survey of Breast Surgeons and Radiation Oncologists on Contemporary Axillary Management in Mastectomy Patients

Annals of Surgical Oncology - Management of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer has undergone significant change over the past decade through landmark clinical trials. This study aimed to assess...     

Comparison of multiple oncotype DX® from the same patient

For women with breast cancer in whom multiple Oncotype DX^® Recurrence Scores (RS) are obtained, RS concordance utilizing current NCCN recommendations has not been evaluated. Patients with two or more RS were identified. RS were stratified by NCCN guidelines and compared for concordance. Twenty-four patients were evaluated. RS concordance varied by tumor type: 100% in the same tumor, 91.7% in multiple ipsilateral tumors, 71.4% in contralateral tumors, and 66.7% in in-breast recurrent tumors. RS concordance for multiple assays in the same patient is not high enough to omit Oncotype DX^® testing for each tumor.