Surgical management of PJI remains challenging with patients failing treatment despite the best efforts. An important question is whether these later failures reflect reinfection or the persistence of infection. Proponents of reinfection believe hosts are vulnerable to developing infection and new organisms emerge. The alternative hypothesis is that later failure is a result of an organism that was present in the joint but was not picked up by initial culture or was not a pathogen initially but became so under antibiotic pressure. This multicenter study explores the above dilemma. Utilizing next-generation sequencing (NGS), we hypothesize that failures after two stage exchange arthroplasty can be caused by an organism that was present at the time of initial surgery but not isolated by culture. This prospective study involving 15 institutions collected samples from 635 revision total hip (n=310) and knee (n=325) arthroplasties. Synovial fluid, tissue and swabs were obtained intraoperatively for NGS analysis. Patients were classified per 2018 Consensus definition of PJI. Treatment failure was defined as reoperation for infection that yielded positive cultures, during minimum 1-year follow-up. Concordance of the infecting pathogen cultured at failure with NGS analysis at initial revision was determined.Introduction
Methods
The statements contained in this document are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of CMS. The authors assume responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the information contained in this document. The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative was introduced to reduce healthcare costs while maintaining quality. We examined data from a healthcare system comprised of five hospitals that elected to participate in the BPCI Major Joint Replacement of the Lower Extremity Model 2 initiative beginning July 1, 2015. We compared one hospital that did 507 BPCI knee cases to the four other hospitals that did 566 cases. Stratifying the data by hospital volume, we sought to determine if costs decreased during the BPCI period, how the savings were achieved, and if savings resulted in financial rewards for participation. The Medicare data included the target cost for each episode (based on historical data from 2009–2012 for each hospital that was adjusted quarterly) and actual Part A and Part B spending for 90 days. Using 1,836 primary knee replacements, we analyzed the costs associated with the anchor hospitalization, inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing facilities, home health, outpatient physical therapy and readmission to compare the 1,073 knees done during the 16-month BPCI initiative period with the 763 knees done during the 1-year period preceding BPCI participation. Owing to the nonparametric distribution of the cost data, a Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the higher volume hospital with the four lower volume hospitals.Background
Methods
