During the last ten years, greater attention
has been given to the management of peri-operative blood loss after
total knee arthroplasty (TKA), as it is a modifiable outcome that has
a significant effect on the rate of complications, the recovery,
and the
Our aim was to estimate the total costs of all hospitalizations for treating periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) by main management strategy within 24 months post-diagnosis using activity-based costing. Additionally, we investigated the influence of individual PJI treatment pathways on hospital costs within the first 24 months. Using admission and procedure data from a prospective observational cohort in Australia and New Zealand, Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups were assigned to each admitted patient episode of care for activity-based costing estimates of 273 hip PJI patients and 377 knee PJI patients. Costs were aggregated at 24 months post-diagnosis, and are presented in Australian dollars.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to estimate the 90-day periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis (OA). This was a data linkage study using the New South Wales (NSW) Admitted Patient Data Collection (APDC) and the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), which collect data from all public and private hospitals in NSW, Australia. Patients who underwent a TKA or THA for OA between 1 January 2002 and 31 December 2017 were included. The main outcome measures were 90-day incidence rates of hospital readmission for: revision arthroplasty for PJI as recorded in the AOANJRR; conservative definition of PJI, defined by T84.5, the PJI diagnosis code in the APDC; and extended definition of PJI, defined by the presence of either T84.5, or combinations of diagnosis and procedure code groups derived from recursive binary partitioning in the APDC.Aims
Methods
Removal of infected components and culture-directed antibiotics are important for the successful treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, as many as 27% of chronic PJI patients yield negative culture results. Although culture negativity has been thought of as a contraindication to one-stage revision, data supporting this assertion are limited. The aim of our study was to report on the clinical outcomes for one-stage and two-stage exchange arthroplasty performed in patients with chronic culture-negative PJI. A total of 105 consecutive patients who underwent revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI were retrospectively evaluated. One-stage revision arthroplasty was performed in 30 patients, while 75 patients underwent two-stage exchange, with a minimum of one year's follow-up. Reinfection, re-revision for septic and aseptic reasons, amputation, readmission, mortality, and length of stay were compared between the two treatment strategies.Aims
Methods
Currently, the US Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) has been testing bundled payments for revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) through the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) programme. Under the BPCI, bundled payments for revision TJAs are defined on the basis of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). However, these DRG-based bundled payment models may not be adequate to account appropriately for the varying case-complexity seen in revision TJAs. The 2008-2014 Medicare 5% Standard Analytical Files (SAF5) were used to identify patients undergoing revision TJA under DRG codes 466, 467, or 468. Generalized linear regression models were built to assess the independent marginal cost-impact of patient, procedural, and geographic characteristics on 90-day costs.Aims
Methods
Rivaroxaban has been recommended for routine use as a thromboprophylactic agent in patients undergoing lower-limb arthroplasty. However, trials supporting its use have not fully evaluated the risks of wound complications. This study of 1048 total hip/knee replacements records the rates of return to theatre and infection before and after the change from a low molecular weight heparin (tinzaparin) to rivaroxaban as the agent of chemical thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing lower-limb arthroplasty. During a period of 13 months, 489 consecutive patients undergoing lower-limb arthroplasty received tinzaparin and the next 559 consecutive patients received rivaroxaban as thromboprophylaxis. Nine patients in the control (tinzaparin) group (1.8%, 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 3.5) returned to theatre with wound complications within 30 days, compared with 22 patients in the rivaroxaban group (3.94%, 95% confidence interval 2.6 to 5.9). This increase was statistically significant (p = 0.046). The proportion of patients who returned to theatre and became infected remained similar (p = 0.10). Our study demonstrates the need for further randomised controlled clinical trials to be conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban in clinical practice, focusing on the surgical complications as well as the potential prevention of venous thromboembolism.
