Procedure Cost Comparison of Outpatient and Inpatient Shoulder Arthroplasty and Lower-Extremity Arthroplasty Within a Managed-Care Organization.

Introduction The authors sought to evaluate cost differences between shoulder arthroplasties and lower-extremity joint replacements in the outpatient and inpatient setting within a large health-maintenance organization. Methods A cross-sectional study of 100 total hip arthroplasties (THA), 100 total knee arthroplasties (TKA), and 100 shoulder arthroplasties (50 anatomical total shoulder arthroplasties and 50 reverse shoulder arthroplasties [RTSA]) was performed at a single regional health care center within an integrated health care maintenance organization. A time-driven activity-based costing methodology was used to obtain total cost of each episode for outpatient (vs) inpatient surgery. Results are presented by procedure type. Results Compared to their respective inpatient procedure, outpatient surgery was less expensive by 20% for RTSA, 22% for total shoulder arthroplasties, 29% for THA, and 30% for TKA. The cost of implants was the highest proportion of cost for all joint procedures across inpatient and outpatient settings, ranging from 28% of the total cost for inpatient THA to 63% of the cost for outpatient RTSA. Discussion Although many factors influence the total cost for arthroplasty surgery, including rate of hospitalization, duration of stay, operative time, complexity of cases, patient factors, equipment, and resource utilization, the implant cost remains the most expensive factor, with hospital bed admission status being the second costliest contribution. Conclusion Outpatient total arthroplasty substantially reduced procedure expenses in a managed-care setting by 20%-30%, although savings for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty was lower than savings for THA or TKA. Implant costs remain the largest portion of shoulder arthroplasty procedure expenses.

Open Implantation of Autologous Chondrocytes Cultured on Porcine Collagen Membrane for the Treatment of a Full-Thickness Patellar Cartilage Lesion.

Large cartilage defects in the knee are debilitating for patients and challenging for surgeons to treat. Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) has gained popularity over the past 20 years and has become the treatment of choice for large cartilage defects for some surgeons. Termed matrix-applied ACI (MACI), use of autologous chondrocytes cultured on porcine collagen membrane has recently been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of symptomatic full-thickness cartilage defects in the knee. This new technique for cartilage repair is the third generation of chondrocyte implantation technology and the first to involve the use of a scaffolding to grow chondrocytes1. MACI is a simpler technique than previous generations and has more reliable chondrocyte seeding. Research has shown that patients do well postoperatively, with improvements in patient-reported outcome out to 5 years postoperatively3. These improvements are statistically greater for patients who underwent MACI when compared to those who underwent microfracture2. (1) Preoperative evaluation: patients are indicated for a cartilage procedure after magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical examination. (2) Stage 1: a diagnostic arthroscopy is performed, and chondrocytes are harvested and cultured. (3) Approach: a short vertical incision is made, followed by a medial parapatellar arthrotomy. (4) Debridement: the lesion is identified and debrided back to stable cartilage. (5): Hemostasis: hemostasis is obtained with an epinephrine-soaked sponge. (6) Template creation: foil is used to create a template of the lesion. (7) Cells cutting: with use of the foil, the membrane of cells is cut to the appropriate size and shape. (8) Implantation: the cut membrane is placed on the lesion and secured with fibrin glue. (9) Testing: the knee is taken through a range of motion and the stability of the membrane is confirmed. (10) Closure: standard closure in layers is performed.