Endovascular revascularization plus supervised exercise versus supervised exercise only for intermittent claudication: A cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND: The ERASE (Endovascular Revascularization and Supervised Exercise) study showed that a combination therapy of endovascular revascularization followed by supervised exercise resulted in greater improvement in walking ability and quality of life as compared with supervised exercise only (standard care) in patients with intermittent claudication. The cost-effectiveness of the combination therapy as compared with supervised exercise is not well defined. In this report, the cost-effectiveness analysis of the ERASE study is presented. METHODS: Two hundred twelve patients were randomly assigned to the combination therapy (n=106) or supervised exercise only (n=106) and were followed for 12 months. Cumulative costs per patient were collected using the in-hospital resource utilization data and cost-questionnaires. Quality-adjusted life years were estimated using the EuroQol-5D questionnaire. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated from both the health care and societal perspective. The associated uncertainty was determined using bootstrap techniques and acceptability curves. RESULTS: As compared with supervised exercise only, the combination therapy cost an additional €1.462 (99% CI, 388 to 3862) from the health care perspective and €161 (99% CI, −2286 to 3106) from the societal perspective. Accumulated quality-adjusted life- years during 1 year follow-up were 0.042 (99% CI, −0.009 to 0.118) higher in the combination therapy group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €34.810 from the health care perspective and €3.833 from the societal perspective. Compared with supervised exercise, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €80.000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the combination therapy had a probability of 87% and 95% of being cost-effective from the health care and societal perspective, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy of endovascular revascularization followed by supervised exercise is clinically and economically a more attractive approach than supervised exercise only for intermittent claudication up to 12-month followup. Yet, the long-term cost- and clinical effectiveness of both strategies for specific patient groups remains to be defined

Long-term Follow-up of a Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Endovascular Revascularization Plus Supervised Exercise with Supervised Exercise only for Intermittent Claudication

Objective: The goal of this study was to assess the long-term effectiveness of combination therapy for intermittent claudication, compared with supervised exercise only. Background: Supervised exercise therapy is recommended as first-line treatment for intermittent claudication by recent guidelines. Combining endovascular revascularization plus supervised exercise shows promising results; however, there is a lack of long-term follow-up. Methods: The ERASE study is a multicenter randomized clinical trial, including patients between May 2010 and February 2013 with intermittent claudication. Interventions were combination of endovascular revascularization plus supervised exercise (n = 106) or supervised exercise only (n = 106). Primary endpoint was the difference in maximum walking distance at long-term follow-up. Secondary endpoints included differences in pain-free walking distance, ankle-brachial index, quality of life, progression to critical limb ischemia, and revascularization procedures during follow-up. This randomized trial report is based on a post hoc analysis of extended follow-up beyond that of the initial trial. Patients were followed up until 31 July 2017. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Results: Median long-term follow-up was 5.4 years (IQR 4.9-5.7). Treadmill test was completed for 128/212 (60%) patients. Whereas the difference in maximum walking distance significantly favored combination therapy at 1-year follow-up, the difference at 5-year follow-up was no longer significant (53 m; 99% CI-225 to 331; P = 0.62). No difference in pain-free walking distance, ankle-brachial index, and quality of life was found during long-term follow-up. We found that supervised exercise was associated with an increased hazard of a revascularization procedure during follow-up (HR 2.50; 99% CI 1.27-4.90; P < 0.001). The total number of revascularization procedures (including randomized treatment) was lower in the exercise only group compared to that in the combination therapy group (65 vs 149). Conclusions: Long-term follow up after combination therapy versus supervised exercise only, demonstrated no significant difference in walking distance or quality of life between the treatment groups. Combination therapy resulted in a lower number of revascularization procedures during follow-up but a higher total number of revascularizations including the randomized treatment. Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry Identifier: NTR2249

Reliability and Reproducibility of the OTA/AO Classification for Humeral Shaft Fractures

Objectives: This study aimed to determine interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the OTA/AO classification for humeral shaft fractures, and to evaluate differences between fracture types, fracture groups, and surgical specializations. Methods: Thirty observers (25 orthopaedic trauma surgeons and 5 general orthopaedic surgeons) independently classified 90 humeral shaft fractures according to the OTA/AO classification. Patients of 16 years and older were included. Periprosthetic, recurrent, and pathological fractures were excluded. Radiographs were provided in random order, and observers were blinded to clinical information. To determine intraobserver agreement, radiographs were reviewed again after 2 months in a different random order. Agreement was assessed using kappa statistics. Results: Interobserver agreement for the 3 fracture types was moderate (κ = 0.60; 0.59-0.61). It was substantial for type A (κ = 0.77; 0.70-0.84) and moderate for type B (κ = 0.52; 0.46-0.58) and type C fractures (κ = 0.46; 0.42-0.50). Interobserver agreement for the 9 fracture groups was moderate (κ = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.48-0.48). Orthopaedic trauma surgeons had better overall agreement for fracture types, and general orthopaedic surgeons had better overall agreement for fracture groups. Observers classified 64% of fractures identically in both rounds. Intraobserver agreement was substantial for the 3 types (κ = 0.80; 0.77-0.81) and 9 groups (κ = 0.80; 0.77-0.82). Intraobserver agreement showed no differences between surgical disciplines. Conclusions: The OTA/AO classification for humeral shaft fractures has a moderate interobserver and substantial intraobserver agreement for fracture types and groups

Reliability, validity, responsiveness, and minimal important change of the Disablities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Constant-Murley scores in patients with a humeral shaft fracture

The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Constant-Murley scores are commonly used instruments. The DASH is patient-reported, and the Constant-Murley combines a clinician-reported and a patient-reported part. For patients with a humeral shaft fracture, their validity, reliability, responsiveness, and minimal important change (MIC) have not been published. This study evaluated the measurement properties of these instruments in patients who sustained a humeral shaft fracture. The DASH and Constant-Murley instruments were completed 5 times until 1 year after trauma. Pain score, Short Form 36, and EuroQol-5D were completed for comparison. Internal consistency was determined by the Cronbach α. Construct and longitudinal validity were evaluated by assessing hypotheses about expected Spearman rank correlations in scores and change scores, respectively, between patient-reported outcome measures (sub)scales. The smallest detectable change (SDC) was calculated. The MIC was determined using an anchor-based approach. The presence of floor and ceiling effects was determined. A total of 140 patients were included. Internal consistency was sufficient for DASH (Cronbach α = 0.96) but was insufficient for Constant-Murley (α = 0.61). Construct and longitudinal validity were sufficient for both patient-reported outcome measures (>75% of correlations hypothesized correctly). The MIC and SDC were 6.7 (95% confidence interval, 5.0-15.8) and 19.0 (standard error of measurement, 6.9), respectively, for DASH and 6.1 (95% CI -6.8 to 17.4) and 17.7 (standard error of measurement, 6.4), respectively, for Constant-Murley. The DASH and Constant-Murley are valid instruments for evaluating outcome in patients with a humeral shaft fracture. Reliability was only shown for the DASH, making this the preferred instrument. The observed MIC and SDC values provide a basis for sample size calculations for future researc

Recovery and functional outcome after radial nerve palsy in adults with a humeral shaft fracture: a multicenter prospective case series

Background: The consequences of radial nerve palsy associated with a humeral shaft fracture are unclear. The aim of this study was to examine the functional recovery of radial nerve palsy, at presentation or postoperatively, in patients with a humeral shaft fracture. Methods: Data from patients who participated in the HUMeral shaft fractures: measuring recovery after operative versus non-operative treatment (HUMMER) study, a multicenter prospective cohort study including adults with a closed humeral shaft fracture Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) type 12A or 12B, and had radial nerve palsy at presentation or postoperatively, were extracted from the HUMMER database. The primary outcome measure was clinically assessed recovery of motor function of the radial nerve. Secondary outcomes consisted of treatment, functional outcome (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and Constant–Murley Score), pain level, quality of life (Short Form-36 and EuroQoL-5D-3L), activity resumption, and range of motion of the shoulder and elbow joint at 12 months after trauma. Results: Three of the 145 nonoperatively treated patients had radial nerve palsy at presentation. One recovered spontaneously and 1 after osteosynthesis. Despite multiple surgical interventions, the third patient had no recovery after entrapment between fracture fragments. Thirteen of the 245 operatively treated patients had radial nerve palsy at presentation; all recovered. Nine other patients had postoperative radial nerve palsy; 8 recovered. One had ongoing recovery at the last follow-up, after nerve release and suture repair due to entrapment under the plate. At 12 months, the functional outcome scores of all patients suggested full recovery regarding functional outcome, pain, quality of life, activity resumption, and range of motion. Conclusion: Radial nerve palsy in patients with a humeral shaft fracture at presentation or postoperatively functionally recovers in 94% and 89%, respectively

Publisher Correction: Economic evaluation of operative versus nonoperative treatment of a humeral shaft fracture: economic analyses alongside a multicenter prospective cohort study (HUMMER) (European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, (2022), 10.1007/s00068-022-02160-1)

In this article, the order that the authors appeared in the author list was incorrect. The correct order is: Saskia H. Van Bergen1 · Esther M. M. Van Lieshout1 · Kiran C. Mahabier1 · Alexandra J. L. M. Geraerds2 · Suzanne Polinder2 · Dennis Den Hartog1 · Michael H. J. Verhofstad1 · on behalf of the HUMMER Investigators

Recovery and functional outcome after radial nerve palsy in adults with a humeral shaft fracture: a multicenter prospective case series

Background: The consequences of radial nerve palsy associated with a humeral shaft fracture are unclear. The aim of this study was to examine the functional recovery of radial nerve palsy, at presentation or postoperatively, in patients with a humeral shaft fracture. Methods: Data from patients who participated in the HUMeral shaft fractures: measuring recovery after operative versus non-operative treatment (HUMMER) study, a multicenter prospective cohort study including adults with a closed humeral shaft fracture Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) type 12A or 12B, and had radial nerve palsy at presentation or postoperatively, were extracted from the HUMMER database. The primary outcome measure was clinically assessed recovery of motor function of the radial nerve. Secondary outcomes consisted of treatment, functional outcome (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and Constant–Murley Score), pain level, quality of life (Short Form-36 and EuroQoL-5D-3L), activity resumption, and range of motion of the shoulder and elbow joint at 12 months after trauma. Results: Three of the 145 nonoperatively treated patients had radial nerve palsy at presentation. One recovered spontaneously and 1 after osteosynthesis. Despite multiple surgical interventions, the third patient had no recovery after entrapment between fracture fragments. Thirteen of the 245 operatively treated patients had radial nerve palsy at presentation; all recovered. Nine other patients had postoperative radial nerve palsy; 8 recovered. One had ongoing recovery at the last follow-up, after nerve release and suture repair due to entrapment under the plate. At 12 months, the functional outcome scores of all patients suggested full recovery regarding functional outcome, pain, quality of life, activity resumption, and range of motion. Conclusion: Radial nerve palsy in patients with a humeral shaft fracture at presentation or postoperatively functionally recovers in 94% and 89%, respectively