Introduction. Cementless total knees were historically associated with early failure. These failures, likely associated with implant design, made cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) the “gold standard”. Manufacturers have introduced newer uncemented technologies that provide good initial stability and utilize a highly-porous substrates for bony in-growth. Outcome data on these implants has been limited. In addition, these implants typically have a price premium which makes them difficult to use in the setting of cost containment and in at risk 90-day bundles. Our purpose was to compare 90-day outcomes of a new uncemented implant with those of a comparable cemented implant from the same manufacturer. We hypothesized that the implants would have equivalent 90-day clinical and economic outcomes. Methods. Ninety-day clinical and economic outcomes for 252 patients with prospectively collected data from the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative (MARCQI) database were reviewed. Ninety-day outcomes were compared between uncemented knees and an age-matched group of cemented knees (Triathlon cemented vs uncemented Triathalon-tritanium, Stryker Orthopedics, Mahwah, NJ, USA). Both cruciate retaining and posterior stabilized designs were included. MARCQI data: demographics, co-morbidities, length of stay, complications, emergency department visits, discharge disposition, and readmissions were reviewed. Financial data provided by the hospital's finance department was used for economic comparisons. Fischer's test was done to assess categorical data and a student's t-test was used to compare numerical data. Results. Uncemented knees had shorter length of stay (1.58 vs. 1.87, p<0.0001), were more frequently discharged home (90.48% vs. 68.75%; p<0.0001) and used less home care or extended care facilities (6.35% vs. 19.14%, p<0.0001; 2.78% vs. 11.72%, p=0.0001). More uncemented knees had “no complications”. Moreover, there were no reoperations in uncemented knees, compared to 19 reoperations in cemented knees most being manipulations (14 vs. 0, p=0.0028). Uncemented knees scored better than age matched counterparts Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (63.69 vs. 47.10, n=85 and 43, p<0.0001), and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System T-physical and T-mental (44.12 vs. 39.45, n=95 and 59, p<0.0001; 51.84 vs 47.82, n=97 and 59, p=0.0018). Cemented cases were more expensive overall, the surgical costs were higher ($6806.43 vs. $5710.78 p<0.01) and the total hospital costs were higher ($8347.65 vs. $7016.11 p<0.01). The 90-day readmission and hospital outpatient costs were not significantly different between the designs. Conclusion. The use of a modern uncemented TKA implants has increased, but data on outcomes and the economic impact has been limited particularly in regard to 90-day at risk global periods. Our study suggests that patients receiving an new uncemented TKA have a shorter length of stay, higher rate of discharge to home, better patient reported outcome measures, fewer complications and fewer reoperations than an age-matched group of patients receiving a similar, cemented design during the 90-day global period. Importantly, the uncemented knees had $1,095 less surgical episode costs (p< 0.001) and a 90-day cost savings of over $1,300 (p< 0.001). Uncemented TKA, when utilizing modern technologies, is successful and economically viable for an at-risk bundle. The results of this study should alleviate fears increased cost, early failure, complications or poor outcomes with the use of a modern uncemented TKA

Aims. The practice of alternating operating theatres has long been used to reduce surgeon idle time between cases. However, concerns have been raised as to the safety of this practice. We assessed the payments and outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed during overlapping and nonoverlapping days, also comparing the total number of the surgeon’s cases and the total time spent in the operating theatre per day. Materials and Methods. A retrospective analysis was performed on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Limited Data Set (LDS) on all primary elective TKAs performed at the New England Baptist Hospital between January 2013 and June 2016. Using theatre records, episodes were categorized into days where a surgeon performed overlapping and nonoverlapping lists. Clinical outcomes, economic outcomes, and demographic factors were calculated. A regression model controlling for the patient-specific factors was used to compare groups. Total orthopaedic cases and aggregate time spent operating (time between skin incision and closure) were also compared. Results. A total of 3633 TKAs were performed (1782 on nonoverlapping days; 1851 on overlapping days). There were no differences between the two groups for length of inpatient stay, payments, mortality, emergency room visits, or readmission during the 90-day postoperative period. The overlapping group had 0.74 fewer skilled nursing days (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.26 to -1.22; p < 0.01), and 0.66 more home health visits (95% CI 0.14 to 1.18; p = 0.01) than the nonoverlapping group. On overlapping days, surgeons performed more cases per day (5.01 vs 3.76; p < 0.001) and spent more time operating (484.55 minutes vs 357.17 minutes; p < 0.001) than on nonoverlapping days. Conclusion. The study shows that the practice of alternating operating theatres for TKA has no adverse effect on the clinical outcome or economic utilization variables measured. Furthermore, there is opportunity to increase productivity with alternating theatres as surgeons with overlapping cases perform more cases and spend more time operating per day. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1081–1086

Introduction

In November 2017, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) finalized the 2018 Medicare Outpatient Prospective Payment System rule that removed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures from the Medicare inpatient-only (IPO) list of procedures. This action had significant and unexpected consequences.

For several years, CMS has utilized a rule called the “Two-Midnight Rule” to define outpatient status for all procedures not on the IPO list. CMS made TKA subject to the “Two-Midnight Rule” in conjunction with the decision to move TKA off the IPO list. According to the “Two-Midnight Rule,” a hospital admission should be expected to span at least two midnights in order to be covered as an inpatient procedure. If it can be reliably expected that the patient will not require at least two midnights in the hospital, the “Two-Midnight Rule” suggests that the patient is considered an outpatient and is therefore subject to outpatient payment policies. Under prior guidance related to the “Two-Midnight Rule;” however, CMS also states that Medicare may treat some admissions spanning less than two midnights as inpatient procedures if the patient record contains documentation of medical need. The final rule was clear in stating CMS's expectation was that the great majority of TKAs would continue to be provided in an inpatient setting.

Abstract. Introduction. This multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluated the clinical and cost effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine for pain and recovery following knee replacement. Methodology. 533patients undergoing primary knee replacement were randomised to receive either liposomal bupivacaine (266mg) plus bupivacaine hydrochloride (100mg) or control (bupivacaine hydrochloride 100mg), administered at the surgical site. The co-primary outcomes were pain visual analogue score (VAS) area under the curve (AUC) 6 to 72hours and the Quality of Recovery 40 (QoR-40) score at 72hours. Results. Primary analysis found no difference in pain VAS AUC 6 to 72hours between liposomal bupivacaine and control (MD -21.5 (97.5% CI -46.8 to 3.8; p=0.057)), nor the QoR-40 at 72hours (MD 0.54, 97.5% CI -2.05 to 3.13, p=0.643). Analyses of pain VAS and QoR-40 scores on days 0, 1, 2 and 3 demonstrated only one significant difference, with the liposomal bupivacaine arm having lower pain scores the evening of surgery (day0; MD -0.54, 97.5% CI -1.07 to -0.02; p=0.021). No difference in cumulative opioid consumption or functional outcome at 6weeks, 6months or 1year was detected. Heath economic analysis found liposomal bupivacaine to be less effective in terms of QALYs as well as more costly. No difference in adverse events between arms was identified. Conclusion. This is the largest RCT evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine It found that compared to bupivacaine hydrochloride local infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine at the surgical site does not provide any clinical or cost benefit for knee replacement and therefore should not be routinely used

Abstract. Design. A pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial to determine whether the intervention is superior to comparator. Setting. 20 NHS Hospitals. Population. NHS patients <60 years with moderate-severe symptomatic knee OA localised to the medial compartment in whom surgical intervention is indicated. Intervention. Surgery with medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO) followed by standard postoperative rehabilitation based on local pathways. Comparator. Tailored non-surgical intervention delivered within an NHS physiotherapy department delivered over 6-contact sessions within a period of 4 months. Outcomes. Primary outcome - 24-month Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS); Secondary outcomes - OKS, FJS-12, EQ-5D-3L, Pittsburgh Sleep Problem Scale, Return to Work, secondary surgical interventions and complications at 12 and 24 months following randomisation. Health economic evaluation - 24-month within trial analysis, and a decision analytic simulation model to account for the impacts of future knee replacements (and associated revisions), and their timing relative to retirement and employment potential. Process evaluation – to explore trial eligibility, recruitment and retention rates, acceptability of intervention implementation and patient experience of taking part/contextual factors that influence this. Follow up. 12 months and 24 months post-randomisation. Sample size. 224 patients; (90% power, 2-sided p=0.05, equivalent to a sample size of 97 per group). Allowing for 15% loss to follow up, 112 patients will be recruited to each arm of the trial. Project timelines. Start date 1 August 2022, total project duration 60 months including a 9-month, 5-site internal pilot, with a recruitment rate of 0.7 patients/site/month

Aims. This aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of designing and introducing generic 3D-printed instrumentation for routine use in total knee arthroplasty. Materials and Methods. Instruments were designed to take advantage of 3D-printing technology, particularly ensuring that all parts were pre-assembled, to theoretically reduce the time and skill required during surgery. Concerning functionality, ranges of resection angle and distance were restricted within a safe zone, while accommodating either mechanical or anatomical alignment goals. To identify the most suitable biocompatible materials, typical instrument shapes and mating parts, such as dovetails and screws, were designed and produced. Results. Before and after steam sterilization, dimensional analysis showed that acrylonitrile butadiene styrene could not withstand the temperatures without dimensional changes. Oscillating saw tests with slotted cutting blocks produced debris, fractures, or further dimensional changes in the shape of Nylon-12 and polymethylmethacrylate (MED610), but polyetherimide ULTEM 1010 was least affected. Conclusion. The study showed that 3D-printed instrumentation was technically feasible and had some advantages. However, other factors, such as whether all procedural steps can be accomplished with a set of 3D-printed instruments, the logistics of delivery, and the economic aspects, require further study. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(7 Supple C):115–120

Background. There are advantages and disadvantages of Unicompartmental (UKR) and Total Knee Replacement, with UKR having better functional outcomes with fewer complications but a higher revision rate. The relative merits depend on patient characteristics. The aim was to compare UKR and TKR risk-benefits and cost-effectiveness in patients with severe systemic morbidity. Methods. Data from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland was linked to hospital inpatient and patient-reported outcomes data. Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade ≥3 undergoing UKR or TKR were identified. Propensity score stratification was used to compare 90-day complications and 5-year revision and mortality of 2,256 UKR and 57,682 TKR, and in a subset of 145 UKR and 23,344 TKR Oxford Knee Scores (OKS). A health-economic analysis was based on EQ-5D and NHS hospital costs. Results. The OKS was significantly better following UKR than TKR with a difference of 1.83 (95%CI 0.10–3.56). UKR was associated with lower relative risks of venous thromboembolism (0.33, CI0.15–0.74), myocardial infarction (0.73, CI0.36–1.45) and early joint infection (0.85, CI0.33–2.19) but only the decrease in venous thromboembolism was significant. The revision risk following UKR was significantly higher than following TKR (hazard ratio 2.70, CI2.15–3.38) and the mortality was significantly lower (0.52, CI0.36–0.74). At five years the cumulative incidence of revision was 8% higher with UKR, and the cumulative incidence of death was 13% lower. The health economic analysis found that UKR dominated TKR having lower costs (£359, CI340-378) and higher quality-of-life gains (0.33, CI-0.31–0.970). Conclusions. For patients with ASA ≥3, UKR was safer and more cost-effective than TKR. In particular if UKR was used instead of TKR the number of lives saved was higher than the number of extra revisions. UKR should be considered the first option for suitable patients with severe co-morbidity

Aims. Responsiveness to clinically important change is a key feature of any outcome measure. Throughout Europe, health-related quality of life following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is routinely measured with EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaires. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 10-Question Short-Form (PROMIS-10 Global Health) score is a new general heath outcome tool which is thought to offer greater responsiveness. Our aim was to compare these two tools. Patients and Methods. We accessed data from a prospective multicentre cohort study in the United Kingdom, which evaluated outcomes following TKA. The median age of the 721 patients was 69.0 years (interquartile range, 63.3 to 74.6). There was an even division of sex, and approximately half were educated to secondary school level. The preoperative EQ-5D, PROMIS-10, and Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) were available and at three, six, and 12 months postoperatively. Internal responsiveness was assessed by standardized response mean (SRM) and effect size (Cohen’s d). External responsiveness was assessed by correlating change scores of the EQ-5D and PROMIS-10, with the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the OKS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the ability of change scores to discriminate between improved and non-improved patients. Results. All measures showed significant changes between the preoperative score and the various postoperative times (p < 0.001). Most improvement occurred during the first three months, with small but significant changes between three and six months, and no further change between six and 12 months postoperatively. SRM scores for EQ-5D, PROMIS-10, and OKS were large (> 0.8). ROC curves showed that both EQ-5D and PROMIS-10 were able to discriminate between patients who achieved the OKS MCID and those who did not (area under the curve (AUC) of 0.7 to 0.82). Conclusion. The PROMIS-10 physical health tool showed greater responsiveness to change than the EQ-5D, most probably due to the additional questions on physical health parameters that are more susceptible to modification following TKA. The EQ-5D was, however, shown to be sensitive to clinically meaningful change following TKA, and provides the additional ability to calculate health economic utility scores. It is likely, therefore, that EQ-5D will continue to be the global health metric of choice in the United Kingdom. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:832–837

Aims

To assess the cost-effectiveness of a two-layer compression bandage versus a standard wool and crepe bandage following total knee arthroplasty, using patient-level data from the Knee Replacement Bandage Study (KReBS).

Introduction. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) removed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from inpatient-only status in 2018. Our goal was to measure the adoption of outpatient TKAs, the impact on re-treatment rates, and the economic implications for hospitals. Methods. We utilized 100% national Medicare Part A fee-for-service (FFS) patient-level claims data for 2017–2018. We excluded DRG 469 TKAs since they are unlikely to be outpatient candidates, which left 257,107 primary TKAs in 2017 and 264,393 in 2018. We examined the time trend in monthly case volume and 30-day retreatment rate (defined as percent of patients having a second TKA within 30 days of the first. We calculated the loss in revenue for a hospital by multiplying the decrease in payment rate between inpatient and outpatient by the outpatient and total 2018 TKA volume. Results. In 2017 0.2% of primary TKAs were performed outpatient. Following the rule change, 25% of cases were performed outpatient in Q1 2018. This stayed at 25% in Q2, increased to 27% in Q3, and then increased to 30% in Q4 2018. The 30-day re-treatment rate was 0.16% in 2017 and 0.15% in 2018. Across hospitals there was the following distribution in the decrease in payment rate from inpatient to outpatient TKAs in 2018: 10. th. percentile: $1,994, 25. th. : $2,612, 50. th. : $3,487, 75. th. : $4,918, 90. th. : $7,231. In 2018 outpatient TKA coding cost hospitals (saved CMS) $243M in Medicare FFS payments (an average of $89,000 per hospital). If all TKAs were performed outpatient hospital Medicare FFS payments would have been $965M lower ($353,000 per hospital) in 2018. Conclusion. Outpatient TKA volumes grew through 2018. This did not impact 30-day retreatment rates. Medicare FFS payment rates declined by a median of $3,487 per outpatient case. As more TKAs are performed outpatient, total Medicare payments will further decline. For figures, tables, or references, please contact authors directly

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in young patients aged under 45 years with traumatic meniscal tears.

Aims. Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) has experienced significant improvements in implant survivorship with second generation designs. This has renewed interest in PFA as an alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for younger active patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PF OA). We analysed the cost-effectiveness of PFA versus TKA for the management of isolated PF OA in the United States-based population. Patients and Methods. We used a Markov transition state model to compare cost-effectiveness between PFA and TKA. Simulated patients were aged 60 (base case) and 50 years. Lifetime costs (2015 United States dollars), quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated from a healthcare payer perspective. Annual rates of revision were derived from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed for all parameters against a $50 000/QALY willingness to pay. . Results. PFA was more expensive ($49 811 versus $46 632) but more effective (14.3 QALYs versus 13.3 QALYs) over a lifetime horizon. The ICER associated with the additional effectiveness of PFA was $3097. The model was mainly sensitive to utility values, with PFA remaining cost-effective when its utility exceeded that of TKA by at least 1.0%. PFA provided incremental benefits at no increased cost when annual rates of revision decreased by 24.5%. . Conclusions. Recent improvements in rates of implant of survival have made PFA an economically beneficial joint-preserving procedure in younger patients, delaying TKA until implant failure or tibiofemoral OA progression. The present study quantified the minimum required marginal benefit for PFA to be cost-effective compared with TKA and identified survivorship targets for PFA to become both less expensive and more effective. These benchmarks might be used to assess clinical outcomes of PFA from an economic standpoint within the United States healthcare system. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1028–36

Aims

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to compare reoperation and revision rates of double plating (DP), single plating using a lateral locking plate (SP), or distal femoral arthroplasty (DFA) for the treatment of periprosthetic distal femur fractures (PDFFs).

A feasibility study of the use of an MRI based patient specific knee arthroplasty system within the NHS. Introducing new technologies within a public funded health system can be challenging. We assess the use and potential benefit of customised jigs for knee arthroplasty. Outcomes assessed were safety and accuracy of implantation. Eight knee replacements using custom jigs were compared to 11 conventionally instrumented replacements matched to surgeon and operative day. Parameters measured include tourniquet time; drain output; hospital stay; adjusted change in haemoglobin; complications; and component position on post-operative long-leg alignment films. None of the parameters observed demonstrated a statistically significant difference from the conventional arthroplasty group. No complications were seen in either group. No significant differences were seen in alignment. Our early experiences show that this technology appears safe and allows accurate implantation of the prosthesis. There was a trend for decreased stay and blood loss. The health economic benefits of navigational arthroplasty have been demonstrated in other studies and come from the lack of instrumentation of the intramedullary canal. MRI based patient specific instrumentation is considered technically easier and more convenient than intra-operative navigation. A larger study is planned to assess the health economic implications of adopting this new technology

Aims

The tibial component of total knee arthroplasty can either be an all-polyethylene (AP) implant or a metal-backed (MB) implant. This study aims to compare the five-year functional outcomes of AP tibial components to MB components in patients aged over 70 years. Secondary aims are to compare quality of life, implant survivorship, and cost-effectiveness.

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe and compare joint-specific and generic health-related quality of life outcomes of the first versus second knee in patients undergoing staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA) for osteoarthritis.

Aims

To identify unanswered questions about the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation and delivery of care of first-time soft-tissue knee injuries (ligament injuries, patella dislocations, meniscal injuries, and articular cartilage) in children (aged 12 years and older) and adults.

Aims

To perform an incremental cost-utility analysis and assess the impact of differential costs and case volume on the cost-effectiveness of robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (rUKA) compared to manual (mUKA).

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a complex procedure which carries both a greater risk for patients and greater cost for the treating hospital than does a primary TKA. As well as the increased cost of peri-operative investigations, blood transfusions, surgical instrumentation, implants and operating time, there is a well-documented increased length of stay which accounts for most of the actual costs associated with surgery. We compared revision surgery for infection with revision for other causes (pain, instability, aseptic loosening and fracture). Complete clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 168 consecutive revision TKAs performed at a tertiary referral centre between 2005 and 2012. Revision surgery for infection was associated with a mean length of stay more than double that of aseptic cases (21.5 vs 9.5 days, p < 0.0001). The mean cost of a revision for infection was more than three times that of an aseptic revision (£30 011 (. sd. 4514) vs £9655 (. sd. 599.7), p < 0.0001). . Current NHS tariffs do not fully reimburse the increased costs of providing a revision knee surgery service. Moreover, especially as greater costs are incurred for infected cases. These losses may adversely affect the provision of revision surgery in the NHS. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:197–201