No Difference in Perioperative Complications for Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty Staged at 1 Week Compared With Delayed Staging.

INTRODUCTION: Controversy exists regarding the safety of simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus two TKA procedures staged months apart in patients with bilateral knee arthritis. Here, we investigated a third option: bilateral TKA staged 1 week apart. In this study, we examined the rate of complications in patients undergoing bilateral TKA staged at 1 week compared with longer time intervals. METHODS: A retrospective review of 351 consecutive patients undergoing bilateral TKA at our institution was conducted. Patients underwent a 1-week staged bilateral procedure with planned interim transfer to a subacute rehabilitation facility (short-staged) or two separate unilateral TKA procedures within 1 year (long-staged). Binary logistic regression was used to compare outcomes while controlling for year of surgery, patient age, body mass index, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: Two hundred four short-staged and 147 long-staged bilateral TKA patients were included. The average interval between procedures in long-staged patients was 200.9 ± 95.9 days. Patients undergoing short-staged TKA had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (3.0 ± 1.5 versus 2.6 ± 1.5, P = 0.017) with no difference in preoperative hemoglobin ( P = 0.285) or body mass index ( P = 0.486). Regression analysis demonstrated that short-staged patients had a higher likelihood of requiring a blood transfusion (odds ratio 4.015, P = 0.005) but were less likely to return to the emergency department within 90 days (odds ratio 0.247, P = 0.001). No difference was observed in short-term complications ( P = 0.100), 90-day readmissions ( P = 0.250), or 1-year complications ( P = 0.418) between the groups. CONCLUSION: Bilateral TKA staged at a 1-week interval is safe with a comparable complication rate with delayed staged TKA, but allows for a faster total recovery time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Profound Impact of Insurance Payor and Socioeconomic Status in Total Hip Arthroplasty Outcomes: Results From a High Volume Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND: Dual eligible Medicare/Medicaid patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) have worse outcomes compared to other insurance payors. Prior literature fails to control for the heterogeneity of care provided amongst a large cohort of hospitals and surgeons as well as differences in patient populations treated. This study compares dual eligible THA patients and Medicaid and Medicare only THA patients at a single high volume tertiary center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent THA for aseptic osteoarthritis of the hip over a three-year period with either Medicaid or Medicare insurance. 3,329 THA patients were included, of which 439 were Medicaid payor, 182 were dual eligible, and 2,708 were Medicare payor. Groups were compared using appropriate tests for direct comparisons and regression analysis. RESULTS: Dual eligible patients were less likely to be white and married, and were more likely to be current smokers and have COPD, liver disease, renal disease, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) compared to Medicare patients. These patients also had a lower age-adjusted Charleson Comorbidity Index when compared to Medicare patients (2.4 vs 3.4, P < .001). When controlling for smoking status, age, BMI and major medical comorbidities, dual eligible and Medicaid patients had increased length of stay (LOS) (0.58, 0.66 days, P < .001), higher risk of discharge to subacute rehabilitation (RR 1.97, 3.19, P < .001), and dual eligible patients more often returned to the ED within 90 days (RR 2.74, P < .001) compared to Medicare patients. CONCLUSION: This study supports the implementation of socioeconomic risk stratification efforts to properly evaluate value-based healthcare metrics in total hip arthroplasty patients.

Does Dual-Eligible Medicare/Medicaid Insurance Status as a Surrogate for Socioeconomic Status Compromise Total Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Medicare/Medicaid dual-eligible patients who undergo primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) demonstrate poor outcomes when compared to patients with other payers. We compare Medicare/Medicaid dual-eligible patients vs Medicare and Medicaid only patients at a single hospital center. METHODS: All patients who underwent TKA for aseptic arthritis between August 9, 2016 and December 30, 2020 with either Medicare or Medicaid insurance were retrospectively reviewed. 4599 consecutive TKA (3749 Medicare, 286 Medicare/Medicaid dual eligibility, and 564 Medicaid) were included. Groups were compared using appropriate tests for direct comparisons and regression analysis. RESULTS: Patients with dual eligibility and Medicaid insurance were less likely to be white and married, more likely to be female and current smokers, and more likely to have COPD, mild liver disease, diabetes mellitus, malignancy, and HIV/AIDS, but had a lower age-adjusted Charleson Comorbidity Index when compared to Medicare patients. When controlling for smoking status and medical comorbidities, patients with dual eligibility and Medicaid insurance stayed in the hospital 0.64 and 0.39 additional days (P < .001), respectively, were more likely to be discharged to subacute rehab (RR 2.01, 1.49, P < .001) and acute rehab (RR 2.22, 2.46, P = .007, < .001), and were 2.14 and 1.73 times more likely to return to the ED within 90 days (P < .001) compared to Medicare patients. CONCLUSION: Value-based healthcare may disincentivize treating patients with low socioeconomic status, represented by Medicaid and dual-eligible insurance status, by their association with increased postoperative healthcare utilization, and less risky patients may be prioritized.

Increasing Reoperations and Failures With Increasing BMI in Patients Undergoing 2-Stage Exchange for Infected Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: While morbid obesity is associated with increased infection after total hip arthroplasty, little is known on the outcomes after 2-stage reimplantation for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in this population. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of morbid obesity (body mass index>40 kg/m2) on reinfection, postoperative complications, readmissions, and reoperations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 107 patients undergoing first time 2-stage reimplantation for PJI from 2013 to 2019. 18 patients (50% women) with body mass index>40 kg/m2 were identified. To minimize confounders, three propensity score matched cohorts were created, yielding 16 nonobese (<30 kg/m2), 16 obese (30-39.9 kg/m2), and 18 morbidly obese (>40 kg/m2) patients. Outcomes were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. All patients had minimum 12-month follow-up, with mean follow-up of 36.3, 30.1, and 40.0 months in the nonobese, obese, and morbidly obese cohorts, respectively. RESULTS: Compared with nonobese patients, morbidly obese patients had a higher rate of reinfection (0% vs 33%, P = .020 and higher likelihood of length of stay>4 days (19% vs 61%, P = .012). In addition, compared with nonobese and obese patients, morbidly obese patients had higher rate of return to the operating room for any reason (13% vs 19% vs 50%, respectively, P = .020). No differences between cohorts were found regarding complications, death, or revision surgery. CONCLUSION: Morbidly obese patients have significantly increased risk of reinfection and reoperation after 2-stage reimplantation for PJI when compared with obese and nonobese patients. These data can be used to counsel morbidly obese patients contemplating total hip arthroplasty and supports the notion of deferring arthroplasty in this population pending optimization.

The Cost Effectiveness of Dilute Betadine Lavage for Infection Prophylaxis in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This article presents a break-even analysis for intraoperative Betadine lavage for the prevention of infection in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Protocol costs, baseline infection rates after arthroplasty, and average revision costs were obtained from institutional records and the literature. The break-even analysis determined the absolute risk reduction (ARR) in infection rate required for cost effectiveness. RESULTS: At our institutional price of $2.54, dilute (0.35%) Betadine lavage would be cost effective if initial infection rates of both TKA (1.10%) and THA (1.63%) have an ARR of 0.01%. At a hypothetical lowest cost of $0.50, the ARR is so low as to be immediately cost effective. At a hypothetical high price of $40.00, Betadine is cost effective with ARRs of 0.16% (TKA) and 0.13% (THA). CONCLUSION: Intraoperative Betadine lavage, at typical institutional prices, can be highly cost effective in reducing infection after joint arthroplasty.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Preoperative Staphylococcus aureus Screening and Decolonization in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This article presents a break-even analysis for preoperative Staphylococcus aureus colonization screening and decolonization protocols in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Protocol costs, baseline infection rates after arthroplasty, and average revision costs were obtained from institutional records and the literature. The break-even analysis determined the absolute risk reduction (ARR) in infection rate required for cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: S aureus nasal screening ($144.07) was cost effective when initial infection rates of TKA (1.10%) and THA (1.63%) had an ARR of 0.56% and 0.45%, respectively. The most inexpensive decolonization treatment ($5.09) was cost effective with an ARR of 0.02% for both TKA and THA. The most expensive decolonization option ($37.67) was cost effective with ARRs of 0.15% (TKA) and 0.12% (THA). CONCLUSION: Preoperative S aureus decolonization can be highly cost effective, whereas colonization screening requires excessively high reductions in infection rate.