Postoperative Complications and Readmission Rates in Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty: Large, Propensity Score-Matched Patient Cohorts.

INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of research comparing postoperative complication rates between manual total knee arthroplasty (M-TKA) and robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA). This study aims to compare 90-day postoperative complication, readmission, and emergency department rates between RA-TKA and M-TKA. METHODS: A retrospective review of a multihospital database identified patients who underwent TKA between January 2016 and May 2023. Surgeons who used the robotic-assisted surgery technique in <10% or >90% of their cases annually were excluded. This resulted in 15,999 cases (8,853 RA-TKAs; 7,146 M-TKAs) from 282 surgeons. RA-TKA and M-TKA cohorts were one-to-one matched based on patient sex, age, body mass index, hospital setting, surgeon experience, primary payer, and anesthesia type. Each cohort consisted of 7,146 patients (N = 14,292). 90-day revisits, specifically readmissions, readmissions with >23 hours of observation, and ED visit rates were compared between cohorts. Complications were classified according to the Clinical Classification Software schema and compared between cohorts. Mann-Whitney U, chi-squared, and Fisher exact tests, along with Bonferroni correction, were used to statistically compare cohorts. RESULTS: All-cause 90-day readmission rates were 2.4% for RA-TKA and 2.6% for M-TKA (P = 0.36). RA-TKA had fewer revisits (RA-TKA: 7.8%; M-TKA: 8.8%, P = 0.027) and rates of readmission with >23 hours of observation (RA-TKA: 1.4%; M-TKA: 2.0%, P = 0.003). RA-TKA had fewer hospital revisits due to joint stiffness (RA-TKA: 17 revisits; M-TKA: 42 revisits, P = 0.002) and chronic pain (RA-TKA: 1 revisit; M-TKA: 8 revisits, P = 0.039). Fewer readmissions were observed for acute injuries (lower extremity muscle/tendon strains) in the RA-TKA cohort (RA-TKA: 1; M-TKA: 9, P = 0.021). RA-TKA had fewer ED visits due to hematomas (RA-TKA: 0 visits; M-TKA: 7 visits, P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective matched cohort analysis, RA-TKA was associated with markedly fewer revisits and readmissions with >23 hours of observation compared with M-TKA. No differences in all-cause 90-day readmission were observed between cohorts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review.

Length of Stay and Discharge Disposition After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Large Multicenter Propensity Matched Comparison of Robotic-Assisted and Manual Techniques.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-arm assistance continues to gain popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for its potential to improve component placement accuracy and patient outcomes. Nonetheless, there is limited data on the impact of robotic-assisted THA (RA-THA) on hospital length of stay (LOS) and discharge location. This study thus aimed to compare LOS, discharge location, and readmission rate for propensity-matched cohorts of RA-THA versus manual THA (M-THA). METHODS: A retrospective review of a multi-hospital database was performed to identify patients who underwent THA between January 2016 and December 2021 from surgeons who performed both RA-THA and M-THA at 77 geographically diverse hospitals. The RA-THA and M-THA cohorts were 1-to-1 matched based on patient sex, age, and body mass index, resulting in 8,536 patients per cohort. Insurance type, LOS, same-day discharge, discharge disposition, and 90-day all-cause readmission rate were compared using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests. RESULTS: Average LOS was significantly shorter for RA-THA patients (1.39 ± 0.85 days) than for M-THA patients (1.48 ± 0.91 days, P < .001). Compared to 5.6% of M-THA patients, 5.3% of RA-THA patients underwent same-day discharge (P = .38). There were statistically significant differences in discharge disposition between cohorts, with more RA-THA cases discharged home without home healthcare compared to M-THA (47.9 versus 45.5%, P = .001) and fewer RA-THA cases discharged to a skilled nursing facility compared to M-THA (5.6 versus 6.9%, P = .001). The 90-day all-cause readmission rate for RA-THA cases was 3.0%, compared to 3.4% for M-THA cases (P = .26). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to M-THA, RA-THA had a shorter average LOS, a similar percentage of patients with same-day discharge, fewer patients who had skilled nursing facility discharge, and a similar all-cause 90-day readmission rate. These results may be of interest to surgeons participating in bundled payment programs and engaging in cost savings.

Understanding economic analysis and cost-effectiveness of CT scan-guided, 3-dimensional, robotic-arm assisted lower extremity arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Aim: The overall goal of this review was to examine the cost-utility of robotic-arm assisted surgery versus manual surgery. Methods: We performed a systematic review of all health economic studies that compared CT-based robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty with manual techniques. The papers selected focused on various cost-utility measures. In addition, where appropriate, secondary aims encompassed various clinical outcomes (e.g., readmissions, discharges to subacute care, etc.). Only articles directly comparing CT-based robotic-arm assisted joint arthroplasty with manual joint arthroplasty were included, for a resulting total of 21 reports. Results: Almost all twenty-one studies demonstrated a positive effect of CT scan-guided robotic-assisted joint arthroplasty on health economic outcomes. For studies reporting on 90-day episodes of costs, 10 out of 12 found lower costs in the robotic-arm assisted groups. Conclusion: Robotic-arm assisted joint arthroplasty patients had shorter lengths of stay and cost savings based on their 90-day episodes of care, among other metrics. Payors would likely benefit from encouraging the use of this CT-based robotic technology.

Robotic-Arm Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty: Workflow Optimization and Operative Times

.Robotic-arm assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) has been demonstrated to offer several benefits, such as increased accuracy in the placement of implants, improved patient outcomes and reduced complications such as dislocations in total hip arthroplasty. However, the potential increase in surgical time may sway some practitioners to hesitate adopting this technology, despite its benefits. Studies of RATHA learning curves have demonstrated that time neutrality can be achieved, but do not describe an efficient workflow. This paper lays out a process to achieve an optimal RATHA workflow and efficiencies in an ambulatory surgery center and presents timing data from 105 cases. We demonstrate that the learning curve for implementing RATHA can be navigated such that providers can offer the clinical benefits of RATHA to their patients without increasing operative or overall perioperative patient time.

Advantages of robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty: a 90-day episode-of-care clinical utility and cost analysis.

Aim: Determine the clinical utility and economic differences over a 90-day period between robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) and manual total hip arthroplasty (MTHA). Methods: Leveraging a nationwide commercial payer database, pre-covid THA procedures were identified. Following a 1:5 propensity score match, 1732 RATHA and 8660 MTHA patients were analyzed. Index costs, index lengths of-stay, and 90-day episode-of-care utilization and costs were evaluated. Results: Episode of care costs for RATHA was found to be $1573 lower compared with MTHA (p < 0.0001). Post-index hospital utilization was significantly less likely to occur for RATHA compared with MTHA. Total index costs were also significantly lower for RATHA versus MTHA (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Index and post-index EOC hospital utilization and costs were lower for RATHA compared with MTHA.

Lengths of Stay and Discharge Dispositions after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparison of Robotic-Assisted and Manual Techniques.

As evidence signifies that short-stay total knee arthroplasties (TKA) can be safe options, it is important to identify factors that contribute to early discharge. There is evidence that robotic-assisted TKAs may lead to shorter lengths of postoperative stays. However, this has not been evaluated as the primary outcome of interest in a large-scale population. The purpose of this study was to compare manual and robotic-assisted TKAs with regard to: (1) length of stay (LOS) and (2) discharge dispositions. TKAs performed between January 1, 2018, to March 31, 2019, were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 10,296 patients were included: 5,993 in the manual and 4,303 in the robotic-assisted group. Length of stay, discharge dispositions, and Charlson comorbidity indices (CCIs) were recorded for all patients. The mean LOS was significantly lower in robotic-assisted (1.68 ± 0.86 days) compared with manual (1.86 ± 0.94 days) TKA procedures (p < 0.00001). In the robotic-assisted group, 2,049 (47.6%) were discharged in 1 day or less compared with 2,325 (38.8%) in the manual group (p < 0.0001). The proportion discharged home was significantly higher for patients who underwent robotic-assisted (91.3%) compared with manual (87.4%) TKAs (p < 0.00001). When comparing only patients who were discharged home and who did not have home health services, the rate was 51.8% in the robotic-assisted group compared with 44.0% in the manual group (p < 0.00001). The mean CCI was similar for patients who underwent robotic-assisted (2.9 ± 1.4 points) compared with manual (3.0 ± 1.5 points) TKAs. There was a trend toward shorter mean LOS for robotic-assisted versus manual TKA at 17 of the 24 included hospital sites (70.8%). Compared with manual, robotic-assisted TKAs demonstrated shorter lengths of postoperative stays and less need for skilled care after discharge. These results suggest the health care burden resulting from an upsurge of TKA procedures in our aging population might be addressed in part by increased utilization of robotic assistance.

Time-Based Learning Curve for Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Study.

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has been shown to improve the accuracy of bone resection, reduce radiographic outliers, and decrease iatrogenic injury. However, it has also been shown that RA-TKA surgical times can be longer than manual surgery during adoption. The purpose of this article was to investigate (1) the characteristics of the operative time curves and trends, noting the amount of surgeons who improved, for those who performed at least 12 cases (based on initial modeling); (2) the proportion of RA surgeons who achieved the same operative times for RA-TKA as compared with manual TKAs; and (3) the number of RA-TKA cases until a steady-state operative time was achieved. TKA operative times were collected from 30 hospitals for 146 surgeons between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. A hierarchical Bayesian model was used to estimate the difference between the mean RA-TKA times by case interval and the weighted baseline for manual times. The learning curve was observed at the 12th case. Therefore, operative times were analyzed for each surgeon who performed at least 12 RA-TKA cases to determine the percentage of these surgeons who trended toward a decrease or increase in their times. These surgeons were further analyzed to determine the proportion who achieved the same operating times as manual TKAs. A further hierarchical Bayesian model was used to determine when these surgeons achieved steady-state operative times. There were 60 surgeons (82%) who had decreasing surgical times over the first 12 RA-TKA cases. The remaining 13 (18%) had increasing surgical times (mean increase of 0.59 minutes/case). Approximately two-thirds of the surgeons (64%) achieved the same operating times as manual cases. The steady-state time neutrality occurred between 15 and 20 cases and beyond. This study demonstrated the learning curve for a large cohort of RA-TKAs. This model demonstrated a learning curve between 15 and 20 cases and beyond. These are important findings for this innovative technology.

A 90-Day Episode-of-Care Analysis Including Computed Tomography Scans of Robotic-Arm Assisted versus Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty.

In this observational, retrospective study, we performed economic analyses between robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) and manual total knee arthroplasty (MTKA). Specifically, we compared: (1) index costs including computed tomography (CT) scans; (2) 90-day postoperative health care utilization, (3) 90-day episode-of-care (EOC) costs, and (4) lengths of stay between CT scan-based robotically-assisted versus MTKAs. A large national database, Blue Health Intelligence (BHI), was used for RATKAs and MTKAs performed between April 1, 2017 and September 30, 2019. Based on strict inclusion-exclusion criteria, with propensity score matching, 4,135 RATKAs and 4,135 MTKAs were identified and analyzed. Index costs to the payer for RATKA patients were found to be less than those for MTKA patients ($29,984 vs. $31,280, p <0.0001). Overall, 90-day EOC costs for RATKA patients were found to be less than that for MTKA patients in the inpatient and outpatient settings. This also holds true for the use of skilled nursing facilities, pharmacies, or other services. In conclusion, the results from our study show that RATKA were associated with lower costs than MTKAs, even when including the cost of CT scans. These results are of marked importance given the emphasis to contain and reduce health care costs.

Robotic-Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: Cost Savings Demonstrated at One Year.

Purpose: Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) has the potential to enhance radiographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare resource utilization, episode-of-care (EOC) costs, readmissions, and complications of robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) and manual TKA (MTKA). Methods: TKA procedures were identified from a private payer claims database. RATKA procedures required both a robotic arm-assisted procedure code and a 60-day pre-operative computed tomography scan. Propensity score matching (1:5 RATKA to MTKA) was performed, based on various patient characteristics and comorbidities. After matching, 4452 patients (742 RATKA and 3710 MTKA) were analyzed for 90-day and one-year EOC costs, index TKA costs, lengths of stay (LOS), discharge statuses, rehabilitation utilizations, as well as 90-day and one-year readmissions- and knee-related complications. Results: RATKA patients had shorter LOS (mean 1.56 versus 1.91 days; p < 0.001), lower index costs by $1762 ($32,747 versus $34,509; p = 0.003), and higher discharges to home rates (51.8 versus 47.8%; p = 0.049) than MTKA patients. RATKA patients had less 90-day (68.5 versus 72.0%; p = 0.048) and one-year (70.8 versus 75.0%; p = 0.016) home health utilizations. The RATKA cohort had lower 90-day ($39,260 versus $41,458; p = 0.001) and one-year ($51,462 versus $54,171; p = 0.011) EOC costs. No significant differences in readmission and overall complication rates were observed (p > 0.05). Conclusion: RATKA was associated with lower index costs and EOC costs at both 90 days and one year. These patients had shorter LOS, were discharged home more frequently, and used less home health services. Cost savings were demonstrated for RATKA beyond the 90-day period with an increase in savings between 90-day and one-year time points. These data may be of importance to payers and providers interested in the longer-term value of RATKA.

Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty: an economic analysis.

Aim: To evaluate 90-day episode-of-care (EOC) resource consumption in robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) versus manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA). Methods: THA procedures were identified in Medicare 100% data. After propensity score matching 1:5, 938 RATHA and 4,670 mTHA cases were included. 90-day EOC cost, index costs, length of stay and post-index rehabilitation utilization were assessed. Results: RATHA patients were significantly less likely to have post-index inpatient rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility admissions and used fewer home health agency visits, compared with mTHA patients. Total 90-day EOC costs for RATHA patients were found to be US$785 less than those of mTHA patients (p = 0.0095). Conclusion: RATHA was associated with an overall lower 90-day EOC cost when compared with mTHA. The savings associated with RATHA were driven by reduced utilization and cost of post-index rehabilitation services.

Health Care Utilization and Payer Cost Analysis of Robotic Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty at 30, 60, and 90 Days.

This study performed a health care utilization analysis between robotic arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and manual total knee arthroplasty (mTKA) techniques. Specifically, we compared (1) index costs and (2) discharge dispositions, as well as (3) 30-day (4) 60-day, and (5) 90-day (a) episode-of-care costs, (b) postoperative health care utilization, and (c) readmissions. The 100% Medicare Standard Analytical Files were used for rTKAs and mTKAs performed between January 1, 2016, and March 31, 2017. Based on strict inclusion-exclusion criteria and 1:5 propensity score matching, 519 rTKA and 2,595 mTKA patients were analyzed. Total episode payments, health care utilization, and readmissions, at 30-, 60-, and 90-day time points were compared using generalized linear model, binomial regression, log link, Mann-Whitney, and Pearson's chi-square tests. The rTKA versus mTKA cohort average total episode payment was US$17,768 versus US$19,899 (p < 0.0001) at 30 days, US$18,174 versus US$20,492 (p < 0.0001) at 60 days, and US$18,568 versus US$20,960 (p < 0.0001) at 90 days. At 30 days, 47% fewer rTKA patients utilized skilled nursing facility (SNF) services (13.5 vs. 25.4%; p < 0.0001) and had lower SNF costs at 30 days (US$6,416 vs. US$7,732; p = 0.0040), 60 days (US$6,678 vs. US$7,901, p = 0.0072), and 90 days (US$7,201 vs. US$7,947, p = 0.0230). rTKA patients also utilized fewer home health visits and costs at each time point (p < 0.05). Additionally, 31.3% fewer rTKA patients utilized emergency room services at 30 days postoperatively and had 90-day readmissions (5.20 vs. 7.75%; p = 0.0423). rTKA is associated with lower 30-, 60-, and 90-day postoperative costs and health care utilization. These results are of marked importance given the emphasis to contain and reduce health care costs and provide initial economic insights into rTKA with promising results.

Robotic arm-assisted knee surgery: an economic analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies on Medicare populations have shown improved outcomes and decreased 90-day episode-of-care costs with robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate expenditures and utilization following RATKA in the population younger than 65 years. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective longitudinal analysis of a commercial claims data set. METHODS: TKA procedures were identified using the OptumInsight Inc database. The procedures were stratified in 2 groups: the RATKA and manual TKA (MTKA) cohorts. Propensity score matching was performed at 1:5. Utilization and associated costs were analyzed for 90 days following the index procedure. A total of 357 RATKA and 1785 MTKA procedures were included in this analysis. RESULTS: Within 90 days post surgery, patients who had RATKA were less likely to utilize inpatient services (2.24% vs 4.37%; P = .0444) and skilled nursing facilities (1.68% vs 6.05%; P < .0001). No patients in the RATKA group went to inpatient rehabilitation, whereas 0.90% of the MTKA arm went to an inpatient rehabilitation facility. Patients who utilized home health aides in the RATKA arm utilized significantly fewer home health days (5.33 vs 6.36 days; P = .0037). Costs associated with overall postsurgery expenditures were $1332 less in the RATKA arm ($6857 vs $8189; P = .0018). The 90-day global expenditures (index plus post surgery) were $4049 less in the RATKA arm ($28,204 vs $32,253; P < .0001). Length of stay after surgery was nearly a day less for the RATKA arm (1.80 vs 2.72 days; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: RATKA was associated with shorter length of stay, reduced utilization of services, and reduced 90-day payer costs compared with MTKA.

Cost Analysis of Dual-Mobility Constructs in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A European Payer Perspective.

Dual-mobility constructs have been shown to significantly and substantially decrease dislocations after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The authors have previously shown that dual-mobility (DM) constructs are cost-effective given their ability to decrease dislocations and re-revision for dislocation. The goal was to report the costs of DM and large femoral head (LFH) constructs in revision THAs from a European health care payer perspective. A Markov model was constructed to analyze the costs incurred by payers in the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, and Spain over 3 years in revision THAs with DM or LFH constructs. Model states and probabilities were derived from prospectively collected registry data in 302 patients who underwent revision THA with a DM or 40-mm LFH construct and were then mapped to corresponding procedural reimbursement codes and tariffs for each country. Costs were weighted average national payments for reintervention procedures performed in the 3 years following revision THA. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis examined the effect of combined uncertainty across all model parameters. During a 3-year period following revision THA, reintervention rates were 9% for DM constructs and 19% for LFH constructs (P=.01). Comparing DM and LFH constructs, cumulative incremental costs over 3-years' follow-up were £428 vs £1447 in the United Kingdom, euro 451 vs euro 1272 in Germany, euro 540 vs euro 1425 in Italy, and euro 523 vs euro 1562 in Spain, respectively. At mid-term follow-up, DM constructs used in revision THAs were associated with a significantly lower risk of reintervention, which translated to lower health care payer costs compared with LFH constructs among European health care payers. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(4):250-255.].