Disposable grasper-integrated flexible cystoscope for ureteral stent removal in transplanted patients; focus on feasibility, safety, and patient experience. Results and micro-cost analysis from a tertiary referral center.

INTRODUCTION & OBJECTIVES: To evaluate ureteral stent removal (SR) using a grasper-integrated disposable flexible cystoscope (giFC-Isiris ®, Coloplast ®) after kidney transplantation (KT), with a focus on feasibility, safety, patient experience, and costs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All consecutive KT undergoing SR through giFC were prospectively enrolled from January 2020 to June 2023. Patient characteristics, KT and SR details, urine culture results, antimicrobial prescriptions, and the incidence of urinary tract infections (UTI) within 1 month were recorded. A micro-cost analysis was conducted, making a comparison with the costs of SR with a reusable FC and grasper. RESULTS: A total of 136 KT patients were enrolled, including both single and double KT, with 148 stents removed in total. The median indwelling time was 34 days [26, 47]. SR was successfully performed in all cases. The median preparation and procedure times were 4 min [3,5]. and 45 s[30, 60], respectively. The median Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score was 3 [1, 5], and 98.2% of patients expressed willingness to undergo the procedure again. Only one episode of UTI involving the graft (0.7%) was recorded. Overall, the estimated cost per SR procedure with Isiris ® and the reusable FC was 289.2€ and 151,4€, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective series evaluated the use of Isiris ® for SR in a cohort of KT patients, demonstrating feasibility and high tolerance. The UTI incidence was 0.7% within 1 month. Based on the micro-cost analysis, estimated cost per procedure favored the reusable FC.

An Improvised Cost-Effective Repair Technique for Management of Broken Luer Connections of Tunneled Dialysis Catheter and Salvage Existing Catheter.

Mechanical problems like break or crack in Luer connectors or hubs, clamps, and tubings are common non-infectious complications of tunneled dialysis catheters (TDC), which may lead to other TDC complications and the need to insert a new catheter. These can be tackled using TDC repair kits or spare parts, which are often not available, resulting in the insertion of a new TDC that increases morbidity, TDC-related procedures, and healthcare costs. We discuss two cases of broken Luer connections of TDC, which were managed by exchanging the broken Luer connector of TDC with the similar Luer connector of a temporary dialysis catheter. Both the repaired TDCs are thereafter functioning well. This improvised technique provides an easy, effective, long-lasting option that salvages the existing TDC and reduces the cost factor.

Outpatient ureteric stent removal following kidney transplantation.

During a kidney transplant, a plastic tube (stent) is placed in the ureter, connecting the new kidney to the bladder, in order to keep the new join open during the initial phase of transplantation. The stent is then removed after a few weeks via a camera procedure (cystoscopy), as it is no longer needed. The present study compared performing this in the operating theatre or in clinic for transplanted patients using a new single-use type of camera with an integrated grasper system. The results have shown that it is safe and cost-effective to do this in clinic, despite patients being susceptible to infection after transplantation.

Determining Variable Costs in the Acute Urolithiasis Cycle of Care Through Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize full cycle of care costs for managing an acute ureteral stone using time-driven activity-based costing. METHODS: We defined all phases of care for patients presenting with an acute ureteral stone and built an overarching process map. Maps for sub-processes were constructed through interviews with providers and direct observation of clinical spaces. This facilitated calculation of cost per minute for all aspects of care delivery, which were multiplied by associated process times. These were added to consumable costs to determine cost for each specific step and later aggregated to determine total cost for each sub-process. We compared costs of eight common clinical pathways for acute stone management, defining total cycle of care cost as the sum of all sub-processes that comprised each pathway. RESULTS: Cost per sub-process included $920 for emergency department (ED) care, $1665 for operative stent placement, $2368 for percutaneous nephrostomy tube placement, $106 for urology clinic consultation, $238 for preoperative center visit, $4057 for ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy (URS), $2923 for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, $169 for clinic stent removal, $197 for abdominal x-ray, and $166 for ultrasound. The lowest cost pathway ($1388) was for medical expulsive therapy, whereas the most expensive pathway ($8002) entailed a repeat ED visit prompting temporizing stent placement and interval URS. CONCLUSION: We found a high degree of cost variation between care pathways common to management of acute ureteral stone episodes. Reliable cost accounting data and an understanding of variability in clinical pathway costs can inform value-based care redesign as payors move away from pure fee-for-service reimbursement.

Techniques for removing root canal posts: an vitro study / Técnicas para remoção de pinos intrarradiculares: um estudo in vitro

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo foi responder qual é a melhor técnica para remoção de pinos de fibra de vidro e pinos metálicos fundidos considerando tempo, preservação da estrutura dentária e custos. Métodos: Foi realizado um estudo in vitro, randomizado e cego. Sessenta dentes tratados endodonticamente foram randomizados em dois grupos de acordo com o tipo de pino. Uma segunda randomização foi realizada para cada tipo de técnica de remoção (ultrassom, broca ou combinada; n=10). One-way ANOVA foi usado para comparar o tempo de remoção do pino, teste t pareado comparou a quantidade de estrutura dentária removida e Kruskal Wallis seguido pelo teste post hoc de Mann-Whitney foram usados para análise de custo (P = 0,05). Resultados: Não houve diferença no tempo de remoção do pino considerando o tipo ou técnica do pino (P=0,630). A perda média de estrutura dentária na região cervical foi superior a 30% quando apenas uma ponta diamantada foi usada para remover pino de fibra de vidro (P<0,00001) e pino metálico fundido (P=0,008). Conclusão: De acordo com os resultados deste estudo, podemos concluir que a seleção da técnica de remoção dependerá da habilidade do operador, e sempre ocorrerá alguma perda de estrutura dentária, embora seja esperada uma perda maior quando apenas pontas diamantadas são usadas para este fim.(AU)

Objective: The aim of this study was to answer which is the best technique to removing glass fiber post and cast metal post considering time, preservation of tooth structure, and costs. Methods: An in vitro, randomized, blinded study was conducted. Sixty endodontically treated teeth were randomized into two groups according to post type. A second randomization was performed for each type of removal technique (ultrasound, drill, or combined; n=10). One-way ANOVA was used to compare the time to post removal, paired t-test compared the amount of tooth structure removed and Kruskal Wallis followed by post hoc Mann-Whitney test were used for cost analysis (P=0.05). Results: There was no difference in post removal time considering post type or technique (P=0.630). The average loss of tooth structure in the cervical region was greater than 30% when only a diamond bur was used to remove fiber glass post (P<0.00001) and cast metal post (P=0.008). Conclusion: According to the results of this study, we can conclude that the selection of the removal technique will depend on the skill of the operator, and some loss of tooth structure will always occur, although greater loss is expected when only diamond burs are used for this purpose.(AU)

Outcomes and Cost Evaluation Related to a Single-Use, Disposable Ureteric Stent Removal System: a Systematic Review of the Literature.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To present the latest evidence related to the outcomes and cost of single-use, disposable ureteric stent removal system (Isiris). RECENT FINDINGS: Our review suggests that compared to a reusable flexible cystoscope (re-FC), a disposable flexible cystoscope (d-FC) with built-in grasper (Isiris) significantly reduced procedural time and provided a cost benefit when the latter was used in a ward or outpatient clinic-based setting. The use of d-FC also allowed endoscopy slots to be used for other urgent diagnostic procedures. Disposable FCs are effective and safe for ureteric stent removal. They offer greater flexibility and, in most cases, have been demonstrated to be cost-effective compared to re-FCs. They are at their most useful in remote, low-volume centres, in less well-developed countries and in centres where large demand is placed on endoscopy resources.

Effect of infusion set replacement intervals on catheter-related bloodstream infections (RSVP): a randomised, controlled, equivalence (central venous access device)-non-inferiority (peripheral arterial catheter) trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of infusion set use to prevent life-threatening catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is unclear. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and costs of 7-day (intervention) versus 4-day (control) infusion set replacement to prevent CRBSI in patients with central venous access devices (tunnelled cuffed, non-tunnelled, peripherally inserted, and totally implanted) and peripheral arterial catheters. METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled, assessor-masked trial at ten Australian hospitals. Our hypothesis was CRBSI equivalence for central venous access devices and non-inferiority for peripheral arterial catheters (both 2% margin). Adults and children with expected greater than 24 h central venous access device-peripheral arterial catheter use were randomly assigned (1:1; stratified by hospital, catheter type, and intensive care unit or ward) by a centralised, web-based service (concealed before allocation) to infusion set replacement every 7 days, or 4 days. This included crystalloids, non-lipid parenteral nutrition, and medication infusions. Patients and clinicians were not masked, but the primary outcome (CRBSI) was adjudicated by masked infectious diseases physicians. The analysis was modified intention to treat (mITT). This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000505000 and is complete. FINDINGS: Between May 30, 2011, and Dec, 9, 2016, from 6007 patients assessed, we assigned 2944 patients to 7-day (n=1463) or 4-day (n=1481) infusion set replacement, with 2941 in the mITT analysis. For central venous access devices, 20 (1·78%) of 1124 patients (7-day group) and 16 (1·46%) of 1097 patients (4-day group) had CRBSI (absolute risk difference [ARD] 0·32%, 95% CI -0·73 to 1·37). For peripheral arterial catheters, one (0·28%) of 357 patients in the 7-day group and none of 363 patients in the 4-day group had CRBSI (ARD 0·28%, -0·27% to 0·83%). There were no treatment-related adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Infusion set use can be safely extended to 7 days with resultant cost and workload reductions. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Patient-Directed Home Drain Removal in Head and Neck Surgery.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of at home drain removal in head and neck surgery patients. METHODS: The study population included patients who underwent head and neck surgery at an academic tertiary care center between February 2020 and November 2020 and were discharged with one to four drains with instructions for home removal. Prior to discharge, patients received thorough drain removal education. Patients were prospectively followed to evaluate for associated outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred patients were evaluated in the study. There was record for ninety-seven patients receiving education at discharge. The most common methods of education were face-to-face education and written instructions with educational video link provided. Of 123 drains upon discharge, 110 drains (89.4%) were removed at home while 13 (10.6%) were removed in office. Most drains were located in the neck (86.4%). There was one seroma, two hematomas, two drain site infections, and five ED visits; however, none of these complications were directly associated with the action of drain removal at home. Calculated cost savings for travel and lost wages was $259.82 per round trip saved. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that home drain removal can provide a safe and efficacious option for patients following head and neck surgery. This approach was safe and associated with patient cost savings and better utilization of provider's time. Furthermore, patients and healthcare providers avoided additional in-person encounters and exposures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings warrant further investigation into cost savings and formal patient satisfaction associated with home drain removal. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:2471-2477, 2021.

Wound infection following implant removal of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella; a protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial investigating the (cost-)effectiveness of 2 g of prophylactic cefazolin compared to placebo (WIFI-2 trial).

BACKGROUND: Elective implant removal (IR) after fracture fixation is one of the most common procedures within (orthopedic) trauma surgery. The rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) in this procedure is quite high, especially below the level of the knee. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not routinely prescribed, even though it has proved to lower SSI rates in other (orthopedic) trauma surgical procedures. The primary objective is to study the effectiveness of a single intravenous dose of 2 g of cefazolin on SSIs after IR following fixation of foot, ankle and/or lower leg fractures. METHODS: This is a multicenter, double-blind placebo controlled trial with a superiority design, including adult patients undergoing elective implant removal after fixation of a fracture of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Exclusion criteria are: an active infection, current antibiotic treatment, or a medical condition contraindicating prophylaxis with cefazolin including allergy. Patients are randomized to receive a single preoperative intravenous dose of either 2 g of cefazolin or a placebo (NaCl). The primary analysis will be an intention-to-treat comparison of the proportion of patients with a SSI at 90 days after IR in both groups. DISCUSSION: If 2 g of prophylactic cefazolin proves to be both effective and cost-effective in preventing SSI, this would have implications for current guidelines. Combined with the high infection rate of IR which previous studies have shown, it would be sufficiently substantiated for guidelines to suggest protocolled use of prophylactic antibiotics in IR of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register (NTR): NL8284, registered on 9th of January 2020, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8284.

Standard Versus Long Peripheral Catheters for Multiday IV Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: In children, intravenous therapy (IVT) is generally administered via peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) (2-6 cm in length). There is evidence that PIVCs are unreliable after 2 days. Long peripheral catheters (LPCs) (6-15 cm in length) could improve the delivery of IVT. The aim of this trial was to determine if LPCs could decrease catheter failure and the number of catheters in children receiving multiday IVT. METHODS: This was an open-label randomized controlled trial conducted at Monash Children's Hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Participants were from the ages of 1 to 17 years, undergoing surgery and requiring >48 hours of postoperative IVT. Participants were randomly assigned to a 2.5-cm 22G PIVC or an 8-cm 22G LPC. RESULTS: Seventy-two children were randomly assigned, 36 received PIVCs, and 36 received LPCs. The median duration of IVT was 5.1 days and was similar between groups (P = .9). Catheter failure was higher for PIVCs than LPCs (66.7% vs 19.4%; relative risk [RR]: 3.4; P = .0001 or 187.9 vs 41.0 failures per 1000 catheter-days). Infiltration was the most common reason for PIVC failure (33.3% vs 2.8%; RR: 12.0; P = .001). LPCs exhibited superior life span (4.7 vs 3.5 days [median]; P = .01). Children with LPCs were twice as likely to complete therapy with a single catheter (80.6% vs 38.9%; RR: 2.1; P = .0006). CONCLUSIONS: LPCs reduce catheter failure and total catheters in children. They should be considered as the first-line device for peripheral access in any child receiving prolonged IVT.

Costs and complications of hospital admissions for inferior vena cava filter malfunction.

OBJECTIVE: Inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) malfunction can result from penetration, fracture, or migration of the device necessitating retrieval. Endovascular and open retrieval of IVCF have been described in institutional series without comparison. This study examines national hospital admissions for IVCF malfunction and compares the outcomes of open and endovascular retrieval. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample database (2016-2017) was reviewed for admissions with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes specific for IVCF malfunction. All ICD-10 procedural codes were reviewed, and patients were divided based on open or endovascular IVCF retrieval. Patient characteristics, outcomes, and costs of hospitalization were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were 665 patients admitted with a diagnosis of IVCF malfunction. Open IVCF retrieval was performed in 100 patients and endovascular removal in 90 patients. Of those undergoing open surgery, 45 patients (45%) required median sternotomy and 55 (55%) required abdominal surgeries. Most patients were white females with a mean age of 54.4 years (range, 49.3-59.6 years) with a history of deep venous thrombosis (55.3%) or pulmonary embolism (31.6%). Most patients with IVCF malfunction were treated in large (81.6%) or urban teaching (94.7%) hospitals situated most commonly in the South (42.1%) and Northeast (29.0%) with no difference in characteristics of the patients or the centers between the two groups. Patients undergoing open IVCF retrieval were more likely to undergo surgery on an elective basis compared with endovascular IVCF retrieval (75.0% vs 11.1%; P < .001). Open IVCF retrieval was associated with a higher likelihood of thromboembolic complication compared with endovascular retrieval (20% vs 0%; P = .04). There was a trend toward higher infectious complications and overall complications with endovascular removal, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. Open retrieval was associated with a mortality of 5.0% compared with no inpatient mortality with endovascular retrieval (P = .33). The mean hospital length of stay was no difference between the two groups. Open retrieval was associated with significantly higher hospital costs than endovascular retrieval ($34,276 vs $19,758; P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Filter removal for patients with IVCF malfunction is associated with significant morbidity and cost, regardless of modality of retrieval. The introduction of specific ICD-10 codes for IVCF malfunction allows researchers to study these events. The development of effective tools for outpatient retrieval of malfunctioning IVCF could decrease related hospitalization and have potential savings for the healthcare system.

Elective replacement of peripheral intravenous cannulas in neonates.

BACKGROUND: Newborns admitted to neonatal units often require vascular access. Peripheral intravenous cannulas allow essential medication, fluids, and/or parenteral nutrition to be delivered. Peripheral intravenous cannulas are often associated with complications, such as extravasation, infiltration, phlebitis, leakage, spontaneous dislodgement, and catheter-associated blood stream infection. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial evaluating standard replacement versus elective replacement (72-96 h) of peripheral intravenous cannula was conducted in a tertiary-level neonatal unit in Melbourne, Australia. The main outcome of this analysis was to assess the risk of combined adverse events associated with elective replacement of peripheral intravenous cannula. A cost analysis of the intervention was also conducted. RESULTS: Combined adverse outcomes noted per infant were 48 (87.27%) in the standard replacement group versus 44 (75.86%) in the elective replacement group (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.71-1.04, p = 0.15). In terms of combined adverse outcome per 1000 intravenous hours, there was a significant risk ratio of 0.81 in the elective group compared with the standard group (95% CI 0.65-0.98, p = 0.04). Gestation (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.58; 95% CI 0.35-0.96, p = 0.03), male gender (AOR 4.65; 95% CI 1.07-20.28, p = 0.04), elective replacement (AOR 0.12; 95% CI 0.03-0.68, p = 0.01), and the total number of re-sites (AOR 27.84; 95% CI 4.61-168.18, p < 0.001) were significant risk factors associated with adverse events. There were also significantly higher costs involved with elective replacement. CONCLUSION: Elective replacement of peripheral intravenous cannulas was not shown to reduce the risk of combined adverse events. Elective peripheral intravenous cannula replacement also incurred a higher cost.

Bent Tibial Nail with Refracture: A Cost-Effective Removal Method: A Case Report.

CASE: A 45-year old man presented with a right open tibial fracture with a prominent, fixed deformity because of a retained right tibial intramedullary nail from a previous tibial fracture. After multiple futile intraoperative attempts to extract the bent nail, it was finally sectioned using an industrial drill bit that permitted its removal and revision tibial nailing. CONCLUSIONS: A tibial fracture resulting in a retained, bent nail presents unique challenges for nail extraction and subsequent exchange nailing. Failed implant removal can be limited by the equipment available in the operating theater. In this setting, the judicious use of inexpensive industrial materials and instruments may be effective in select cases.

2020 John N. Insall Award: Removal of total knee arthroplasty from the inpatient-only list adversely affects bundled payment programmes.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the removal of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the Medicare Inpatient Only (IPO) list on our Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) Initiative in 2018. METHODS: We examined our institutional database to identify all Medicare patients who underwent primary TKA from 2017 to 2018. Hospital inpatient or outpatient status was cross-referenced with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) claims data. Demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes were compared between patients classified as 'outpatient' and 'inpatient' TKA. Episode-of-care BPCI costs were then compared from 2017 to 2018. RESULTS: Of the 2,135 primary TKA patients in 2018, 908 (43%) were classified as an outpatient and were excluded from BPCI. Inpatient classified patients had longer mean length of stay (1.9 (SD 1.4) vs 1.4 (SD 1.7) days, p < 0.001) and higher rates of discharge to rehabilitation (17% vs 3%, p < 0.001). Post-acute care costs increased when comparing the BPCI patients from 2017 to 2018, ($5,037 (SD $7,792) vs $5793 (SD $8,311), p = 0.010). The removal of TKA from the IPO list turned a net savings of $53,805 in 2017 into a loss of $219,747 in 2018 for our BPCI programme. CONCLUSIONS: Following the removal of TKA from the IPO list, nearly half of the patients at our institution were inappropriately classified as an outpatient. Our target price was increased and our institution realized a substantial loss in 2018 BPCI despite strong quality metrics. CMS should address its negative implications on bundled payment programmes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):19-23.

Permanent inferior vena cava filters offer greater expected patient utility at lower predicted cost.

OBJECTIVE: Retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters were first approved for use in the United States in 2003 to address the long-term complications of migration, thrombosis, fracture, and perforation observed with permanent IVC filter implantation. Although Food and Drug Administration approval of retrievable IVC filters includes permanent implantation, the incidence of complications from long-term implantation appears to be greater than that reported with existing permanent IVC filters. Also, only a small fraction of such retrievable IVC filters are ever retrieved. The purpose of the present study was to determine the threshold retrieval rate at which the use of retrievable IVC filters could be justified. METHODS: A Markov decision tree was constructed comparing retrievable and permanent IVC filters regarding their effectiveness and cost. A review of the reported data provided outcome probabilities, and the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry was the source of the utility values for the various potential outcomes. Medicare reimbursement rates served as a proxy for costs. A sensitivity analysis was performed for various parameters, primarily to determine the retrieval rate threshold at which the use of retrievable IVC filters would outperform the use of permanent IVC filters. RESULTS: Base case analysis demonstrated a greater predicted effectiveness for permanent compared with retrievable IVC filter implantation (5.41 quality-adjusted life-years [QALY] vs 5.33 QALY) at a lower cost ($2070 vs $4650). Monte Carlo simulation at 10,000 iterations confirmed the expected utility (5.4 ± 3.0 QALY vs 5.3 ± 3.0 QALY; P = .0002) and cost ($1900 ± $7400 vs $4800 ± 9900; P < .0001) to be statistically superior for permanent IVC filters. A sensitivity analysis for the filter retrieval rate demonstrated that the strategy of using a retrievable IVC filter was never preferable for utility or cost. The superiority of permanent IVC filter placement for effectiveness and cost persisted, regardless of anticipated patient-predicted annual mortality. A two-way sensitivity analysis for both IVC filter removal rate and annual patient mortality confirmed the superiority of permanent IVC filter placement at all levels. CONCLUSIONS: The predicted effectiveness of permanent IVC filters was greater and the predicted cost lower than those for retrievable IVC filters, regardless of the IVC filter retrieval rate. This interpretation of existing reported data using Markov decision analysis modeling supports the argument that unless the long-term complication rate of retrievable IVC filters can be significantly improved, their use should be abandoned in favor of currently available permanent IVC filters.

Impact of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: A Clinical and Economic Analysis of the WRAP-IT Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current understanding of the impact of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is based on retrospective analyses from medical records or administrative claims data. The WRAP-IT (Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial) offers an opportunity to evaluate the clinical and economic impacts of CIED infection from the hospital, payer, and patient perspectives in the US healthcare system. METHODS: This was a prespecified, as-treated analysis evaluating outcomes related to major CIED infections: mortality, quality of life, disruption of CIED therapy, healthcare utilization, and costs. Payer costs were assigned using medicare fee for service national payments, while medicare advantage, hospital, and patient costs were derived from similar hospital admissions in administrative datasets. RESULTS: Major CIED infection was associated with increased all-cause mortality (12-month risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 3.41 [95% CI, 1.81-6.41]; P<0.001), an effect that sustained beyond 12 months (hazard ratio through all follow-up, 2.30 [95% CI, 1.29-4.07]; P=0.004). Quality of life was reduced (P=0.004) and did not normalize for 6 months. Disruptions in CIED therapy were experienced in 36% of infections for a median duration of 184 days. Mean costs were $55 547±$45 802 for the hospital, $26 867±$14 893, for medicare fee for service and $57 978±$29 431 for Medicare Advantage (mean hospital margin of -$30 828±$39 757 for medicare fee for service and -$6055±$45 033 for medicare advantage). Mean out-of-pocket costs for patients were $2156±$1999 for medicare fee for service, and $1658±$1250 for medicare advantage. CONCLUSIONS: This large, prospective analysis corroborates and extends understanding of the impact of CIED infections as seen in real-world datasets. CIED infections severely impact mortality, quality of life, healthcare utilization, and cost in the US healthcare system. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT02277990.

Reduced incidence and economic cost of hardware removal after ankle fracture surgery: a 20-year nationwide registry study.

Background and purpose - Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is a treatment method for unstable ankle fractures. During recent years, scientific evidence has shed light on surgical indications as well as on hardware removal. We assessed the incidence and trends of hardware removal procedures following ORIF of ankle fractures.Patients and methods - The study covered all patients 18 years of age and older who had an ankle fracture treated with ORIF in Finland between the years 1997 and 2016. Patient data were obtained from the Finnish National Hospital Discharge Register.Results - 68,865 patients had an ankle fracture treated with ORIF in Finland during the 20-year study period between 1997 and 2016. A hardware removal procedure was performed on 27% of patients (n = 18,648). The incidence of hardware removal procedures after ankle fracture decreased from 31 (95% CI 29-32) per 100,000 person-years in the highest year 2001 (n = 1,247) to 13 (CI 12-14) per 100,000 person-years in 2016 (n = 593). Moreover, the proportion and number of removal operations performed within the first 3 months also decreased. The costs of removal procedures decreased from approximately €994,000 in 2001 to €472,600 in 2016.Interpretation - Removal of hardware after ankle surgery (ORIF) is a common operation with substantial costs. However, the incidence and cost of removals decreased during the study period, with a particular decrease in hardware removal operations within 3 months.

Removal of a urinary catheter before discontinuation of epidural analgesia is associated with an increased risk of postoperative urinary retention and hospital episode costs in patients undergoing surgical correction for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

OBJECTIVES: In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients undergoing posterior spinal instrumented fusion (PSIF), we aimed to answer these questions: (1) is there a difference in postoperative urinary retention (UR) rates among patients who had removal of their Foley catheters before vs. after discontinuation of epidural analgesia (EA)? (2) Can the timing of Foley catheter removal be an independent risk factor for postoperative UR requiring recatheterization? (3) Is there an incurred cost related to treating UR? STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. BACKGROUND: EA has been widely used for postoperative pain control after PSIF for AIS. In these patients, removing the Foley catheter, inserted for intraoperative monitoring of urine output, is indicated in the early postoperative period. However, a controversy exists as to whether it should be removed before or after the EA has been discontinued. METHODS: A single-institution, longitudinally maintained database was queried to identify 297 patients who met specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patient characteristics and the order and timing of removing the urinary and epidural catheters were collected. Rates of UR were statistically compared in patients who had early vs. late urinary catheter removal. A univariate and multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors. Hospital episode costs were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients who had early (n = 66, 22%) vs. late (n = 231, 78%) urinary catheter removal had a significantly higher incidence of UR requiring recatheterization (15 vs. 4.7%, p = 0.007). Patient with early removal were almost 4 times more likely to develop UR requiring recatheterization [odds ratio (OR) 3.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5-9.7, p = 0.005]. UR incurred additional costs averaging $15,000/patient (p = 0.204). CONCLUSION: In patients who had PSIF for AIS, removal of a urinary catheter before discontinuation of EA is an independent risk factor for UR, requiring recatheterization and associated with increased cost. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Financial and resource costs of transvenous lead extraction in a high-volume lead extraction centre.

OBJECTIVES: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) poses a significant economic and resource burden on healthcare systems; however, limited data exist on its true cost. We therefore estimate real-world healthcare reimbursement costs of TLE to the UK healthcare system at a single extraction centre. METHODS: Consecutive admissions entailing TLE at a high-volume UK centre between April 2013 and March 2018 were prospectively recorded in a computer registry. In the hospital's National Health Service (NHS) clinical coding/reimbursement database, 447 cases were identified. Mean reimbursement cost (n=445) and length of stay (n=447) were calculated. Ordinary least squares regressions estimated the relationship between cost (bed days) and clinical factors. RESULTS: Mean reimbursement cost per admission was £17 399.09±£13 966.49. Total reimbursement for all TLE admissions was £7 777 393.51. Mean length of stay was 16.3±15.16 days with a total of 7199 bed days. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronisation therapy defibrillator devices incurred higher reimbursement costs (70.5% and 68.7% higher, respectively, both p<0.001). Heart failure and prior valve surgery also incurred significantly higher reimbursement costs. Prior valve surgery and heart failure were associated with 8.3 (p=0.017) and 5.5 (p=0.021) additional days in hospital, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Financial costs to the NHS from TLE are substantial. Consideration should therefore be given to cost/resource-sparing potential of leadless/extravascular cardiac devices that negate the need for TLE particularly in patients with prior valve surgery and/or heart failure. Additionally, use of antibiotic envelopes and other interventions that reduce infection risk in patients receiving transvenous leads should be considered.