Many different designs of total hip arthroplasty
(THA) with varying performance and cost are available. The identification
of those which are the most cost-effective could allow significant
cost-savings. We used an established Markov model to examine the
cost effectiveness of five frequently used categories of THA which differed
according to bearing surface and mode of fixation, using data from
the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Kaplan–Meier
analyses of rates of revision for men and women were modelled with
parametric distributions. Costs of devices were provided by the
NHS Supply Chain and associated costs were taken from existing studies.
Lifetime costs, lifetime quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) and
the probability of a device being cost effective at a willingness
to pay £20 000/QALY were included in the models. The differences in QALYs between different categories of implant
were extremely small (<
0.0039 QALYs for men or women over the
patient’s lifetime) and differences in cost were also marginal (£2500
to £3000 in the same time period). As a result, the probability
of any particular device being the most cost effective was very
sensitive to small, plausible changes in quality of life estimates
and cost. Our results suggest that available evidence does not support
recommending a particular device on cost effectiveness grounds alone.
We would recommend that the choice of prosthesis should be determined
by the rate of revision, local costs and the preferences of the
surgeon and patient. Cite this article:
The past ten years have brought plenty of research and technical innovations and also preliminary clinical success in cartilage repair. The common target of all methods utilised is to produce a sufficiently stable quality of cartilage repair or regenerate. However, yet today clinical, radiological and histological results analysing the different techniques are somewhat contradictory. The different lines of clinically applied and basic research have focused on:
1) Spontaneous natural filling of the defect with fibro-cartilage of variable solidity. - Abrasion chondroplasty, drilling or microfracturing to allow for mobilisation of progenitor cells and mesenchymal stem cells from the cancellous bone into the defect and develop to a hyaline like cartilage. - Stem cell treatment (in vivo or ex vivo theory of potential technique by which stem cells could be brought to a defect to create cartilage; so far no directly linked product available) 2) Transplantation of osteochondral auto grafts (Mosaicplasty, OATS, SDS, patellar graft) or allograft. 3a) Autologous chondrocyte transplantation and periosteal coverage (ACT) to cover bigger surfaces. 3b) Implantation of second and third generation ex vivo products and create less morbidity but without knowing whether the results are as long-lasting as for the originally described technique (chondrocytes cultured on membranes, MACI, in gels, implantation of a stable three-dimensional de novo cartilage disk or even engineered osteochondral grafts, AMIC: autologous membrane induced chondrogenesis). A fair amount of today’s laboratory research is focusing on the culture of the patients own chondrocytes or his own stem cells. Clinically, some methods can be applied in all indications regardless of size, localisation, depth of the lesion up to the age of fifty years and this is valid for lesions in the knee, the shoulder, the talus, the elbow etc. Other methods like AOCT should not be used for lesions over 2cm in diameter because of donor side morbidity. All methods claim to have As Nicotine abuse, probably for all techniques decreases the rate of success of cartilage repair or regeneration and osteotomy healing. Roughly 300 cases have been treated during the last 10 years. The results were reported in 2002. As an