Conversion Total Knee Arthroplasty Needs Its Own Diagnosis Related Group Facility Reimbursement Code

Introduction: Conversion from a prior surgery to a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a more technically difficult procedure than primary TKA and is associated with worse short-term outcomes and increased complication and readmission rates, despite being undifferentiated under the current bundled payment model. The aim of this study was to determine differences in facility costs between primary TKA and conversion TKA, which we hypothesize are significant, to ensure providers are not penalized for treatment and high-risk patients have the same access to care. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of patients undergoing primary TKA at two hospitals within Rothman Orthopaedic Institute from 2015-2017, comparing itemized facility costs between primary and conversion TKA patients. Secondary endpoints included length of stay, discharge disposition, and additional implants used. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for increased facility costs, the need for additional implants, length of stay, and discharge disposition. Results: Of 2447 primary TKA procedures, 678 (27.7%) underwent conversion to TKA, which was associated with greater implant costs ($3424.25 vs. 3272.29, P\u3c0.0001), preoperative personnel costs ($1269.89 vs. $1217.72, p\u3c0.0001), and total costs ($6859.16 vs. $6703.55, p=0.0015). Presence of prior surgical hardware was a risk factor for increased implant costs ($501.1 increase, p=0.0024) and total cost ($501.4 increase, p=0.0024). Discussion: Conversion TKA is associated with significantly greater facility costs than primary TKA, thus confirming our hypothesis, and should be adjusted for in alternative payment models to ensure these patients do not encounter difficulties in accessing quality orthopaedic care

The Use of Cementless Components Does Not Significantly Increase Procedural Costs in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Introduction: Modern cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs have shown promising early clinical success; however, concerns exist regarding the higher cost of the cementless implants. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the total facility cost of cementless vs traditional cemented TKA along with the effect of cementless fixation on short-term outcomes. Methods: We reviewed a consecutive series of patients between 2015 and 2017 who underwent either cementless or cemented primary TKA. Itemized facility costs were calculated for every procedure using a time-driven activity-based costing algorithm. Controlling for demographic variables and medical comorbidities, we performed a multivariate analysis to identify independent risk factors for facility costs following TKA. Short-term outcome metrics including complications, readmissions, and patient-reported outcomes were compared between groups. Results: Among the 2426 primary TKA patients in this study, 119 (4.91%) were performed using cementless implants. When compared to cemented TKA, cementless TKA patients had higher implant costs, but lower supply costs and lower operating room personnel costs. When controlling for confounding variables, cementless fixation did not have a significant effect on total facility cost or outcomes. Discussion: The use of cementless TKA implants did not significantly increase total procedural costs when compared to traditional cemented TKA components at our institution. Our data suggest that the increased cost of a cementless implant is recouped through savings in cost of cement and supplies, as well as shorter operative times. The authors encourage investigators at other institutions to use the authors\u27 methodology to evaluate (preferably in a prospective manner) whether the findings from this study can be corroborated

Modular junction fractures in a modern rotating-platform knee arthroplasty system

In this series, we report the findings from four patients who presented with pain and mechanical symptoms after revision total knee arthroplasty with the DePuy Sigma TC3 RP prosthesis. Plain radiographs for each patient demonstrated failure of the femoral component at the modular junction of the femoral prosthesis. Retrieved implants at the time of surgery revealed fractures occurring exclusively at the femoral adapter bolt and the corresponding adapter. Retrieval analysis was performed on two of the four cases by visual light microscopy. Our findings suggest that the implants had suffered from fatigue fractures likely due to cyclic loading. This is the first case series to describe the failure mechanism and clinical scenarios contributing to failure of the femoral locking bolt and adapter sleeve in this prosthesis. Keywords: Total knee arthroplasty, Implant failure revision, Modula

Routine Pathologic Examination of the Femoral Head in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Survey Study of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons

Background: Current literature does not provide conclusive evidence on whether routine pathologic examination of femoral heads from total hip arthroplasty is indicated or cost-effective. As a result, there is substantial variation in opinion among surgeons related to this issue. Our study aim was to determine factors that impact surgeon propensity to order pathologic examination of femoral heads. Methods: A 12-question survey was created to evaluate surgeon practices, indications, and patient care implications surrounding routine pathologic examination of femoral heads. The email survey was distributed to all members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (n = 2598). Results: There were 572 survey respondents. Out of all respondents, 28.4% always send femoral heads to pathology, and 27.6% reported an institutional requirement to do so. Of the 572 surgeons, 73.6% report femoral head pathology has never resulted in a change in patient disease course. Factors that increase the likelihood of surgeons ordering femoral head pathologic examination include institutional requirements, medicolegal concern, and prior experience with femoral head pathologic examination changing patients' disease course (P < .001). Cost concern decreases the likelihood of surgeons ordering femoral head pathologic examination (P = .0012). Conclusions: A minority of surgeons routinely send femoral heads from total hip arthroplasty for pathologic examination, mostly because of institutional requirement. The majority of surgeons feel that femoral head pathologic examination never changes patient management, although others have infrequently detected malignancy and infection. Institutional policy, concern for litigation, and prior experience with discordant pathologic diagnoses increase femoral head pathologic examinations, while cost concern decreases them