Fasting Versus Nonfasting and Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Recent recommendations favoring nonfasting lipid assessment may affect low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) estimation. The novel method of LDL-C estimation (LDL-CN) uses a flexible approach to derive patient-specific ratios of triglycerides to very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. This adaptability may confer an accuracy advantage in nonfasting patients over the fixed approach of the classic Friedewald method (LDL-CF). METHODS: We used a US cross-sectional sample of 1 545 634 patients (959 153 fasting ≥10-12 hours; 586 481 nonfasting) from the second harvest of the Very Large Database of Lipids study to assess for the first time the impact of fasting status on novel LDL-C accuracy. Rapid ultracentrifugation was used to directly measure LDL-C content (LDL-CD). Accuracy was defined as the percentage of LDL-CD falling within an estimated LDL-C (LDL-CN or LDL-CF) category by clinical cut points. For low estimated LDL-C (<70 mg/dL), we evaluated accuracy by triglyceride levels. The magnitude of absolute and percent differences between LDL-CD and estimated LDL-C (LDL-CN or LDL-CF) was stratified by LDL-C and triglyceride categories. RESULTS: In both fasting and nonfasting samples, accuracy was higher with the novel method across all clinical LDL-C categories (range, 87%-94%) compared with the Friedewald estimation (range, 71%-93%; P≤0.001). With LDL-C <70 mg/dL, nonfasting LDL-CN accuracy (92%) was superior to LDL-CF accuracy (71%; P<0.001). In this LDL-C range, 19% of fasting and 30% of nonfasting patients had differences ≥10 mg/dL between LDL-CF and LDL-CD, whereas only 2% and 3% of patients, respectively, had similar differences with novel estimation. Accuracy of LDL-C <70 mg/dL further decreased as triglycerides increased, particularly for Friedewald estimation (range, 37%-96%) versus the novel method (range, 82%-94%). With triglycerides of 200 to 399 mg/dL in nonfasting patients, LDL-CN <70 mg/dL accuracy (82%) was superior to LDL-CF (37%; P<0.001). In this triglyceride range, 73% of fasting and 81% of nonfasting patients had ≥10 mg/dL differences between LDL-CF and LDL-CD compared with 25% and 20% of patients, respectively, with LDL-CN. CONCLUSIONS: Novel adaptable LDL-C estimation performs better in nonfasting samples than the fixed Friedewald estimation, with a particular accuracy advantage in settings of low LDL-C and high triglycerides. In addition to stimulating further study, these results may have immediate relevance for guideline committees, laboratory leadership, clinicians, and patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01698489.

Impact of Novel Low-Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol Assessment on the Utility of Secondary Non-High-Density Lipoprotein-C and Apolipoprotein B Targets in Selected Worldwide Dyslipidemia Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Selected dyslipidemia guidelines recommend non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (apoB) as secondary targets to the primary target of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C). After considering 2 LDL-C estimates that differ in accuracy, we examined: (1) how frequently non-HDL-C guideline targets could change management; and (2) the utility of apoB targets after meeting LDL-C and non-HDL-C targets. METHODS: We analyzed 2518 adults representative of the US population from the 2011 to 2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and 126 092 patients from the Very Large Database of Lipids study with apoB. We identified all individuals as well as those with high-risk clinical features, including coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, and metabolic syndrome who met very high- and high-risk guideline targets of LDL-C <70 and <100 mg/dL using Friedewald estimation (LDL-CF) and a novel, more accurate method (LDL-CN). Next, we examined those not meeting non-HDL-C (<100, <130 mg/dL) and apoB (<80, <100 mg/dL) guideline targets. In those meeting dual LDL-C and non-HDL-C targets (<70 and <100 mg/dL, respectively, or <100 and <130 mg/dL, respectively), we determined the proportion of individuals who did not meet guideline apoB targets (<80 or <100 mg/dL). RESULTS: A total of 7% to 9% and 31% to 36% of individuals had LDL-C <70 and <100 mg/dL, respectively. Among those with LDL-CF<70 mg/dL, 14% to 15% had non-HDL-C ≥100 mg/dL, and 7% to 8% had apoB ≥80 mg/dL. Among those with LDL-CF<100 mg/dL, 8% to 10% had non-HDL-C ≥130 mg/dL and 2% to 3% had apoB ≥100 mg/dL. In comparison, among those with LDL-CN<70 or 100 mg/dL, only ≈2% and ≈1% of individuals, respectively, had non-HDL-C and apoB values above guideline targets. Similar trends were upheld among those with high-risk clinical features: ≈0% to 3% of individuals with LDL-CN<70 mg/dL had non-HDL-C ≥100 mg/dL or apoB ≥80 mg/dL compared with 13% to 38% and 9% to 25%, respectively, in those with LDL-CF<70 mg/dL. With LDL-CF or LDL-CN<70 mg/dL and non-HDL-C <100 mg/dL, 0% to 1% had apoB ≥80 mg/dL. Among all dual LDL-CF or LDL-CN<100 mg/dL and non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL individuals, 0% to 0.4% had apoB ≥100 mg/dL. These findings were robust to sex, fasting status, and lipid-lowering therapy status. CONCLUSIONS: After more accurately estimating LDL-C, guideline-suggested non-HDL-C targets could alter management in only a small fraction of individuals, including those with coronary artery disease and other high-risk clinical features. Furthermore, current guideline-suggested apoB targets provide modest utility after meeting cholesterol targets. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01698489.

Addressing Knowledge Gaps in the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk: a Review of Recent Coronary Artery Calcium Literature.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) has been proposed as an integrator of information from traditionally measured, non-traditionally measured, and unmeasured risk factors for coronary atherosclerosis. The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guideline on the Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk identified several knowledge gaps regarding CAC, including radiation risks, cost-effectiveness, and improving discrimination and reclassification of estimated risk over the Pooled Cohort Equations in the ACC/AHA Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Estimator. In this review, we focus on recent CAC literature addressing these knowledge gaps. We further highlight the potential for CAC to enrich future randomized controlled trials. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of CAC allows for personalization of cardiovascular risk despite the presence or absence of traditional risk factors across many demographics. Avenues to reduce radiation exposure associated with CAC scanning include increasing the interval between scans for those with CAC scores of zero and estimating CAC from non-cardiac gated CT scans. While limited studies have suggested cost-effectiveness in cardiac risk assessment with the incorporation of CAC in screening algorithms, several studies have demonstrated the ability of CAC to identify non-traditional risk factors that may be used to expand cardiovascular risk personalization in other high-risk populations. Literature from the past 2 years further supports CAC as a strong marker to personalize cardiac risk assessment. While multiple potential avenues to reduce radiation are available and cost-effectiveness analyses are encouraging, further studies are necessary to clarify patient selection for CAC scanning given the interplay between CAC and other imaging modalities in risk personalization algorithms.

Does Physician Reimbursement Correlate to Risk in Orthopaedic Trauma?

This study investigated whether current Medicare reimbursements for orthopaedic trauma procedures correlate with complications. A total of 18,510 patients representing 33 orthopaedic trauma procedures from 2005 to 2011 were studied. Adverse events and Medicare payments for each orthopaedic trauma procedure were collected. Linear regressions determined correlations between complications and Medicare payments for orthopaedic trauma procedures. A weak correlation between Medicare payments and complications was found for all procedures (r = .399, p = .021). A 1.0% increase in complications was associated with a payment increase of only $100. There were no correlations between complications and reimbursements for upper extremity (p = .878) and lower extremity (p = .713) procedures. A strong correlation (r = .808, p = .015) existed for hip and pelvic fractures, but a 1.1% increase in hip and pelvic complications correlated with only an increase of $100 in reimbursements. This study is the first to show that Medicare payments are not strongly correlated with complications, therefore demonstrating the potential risks of a bundled payment system for orthopaedic trauma surgeons.

Damage Control Plating in Open Tibial Shaft Fractures: A Cheaper and Equally Effective Alternative to Spanning External Fixation.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate damage control plating (DCP) as an alternative to external fixation (EF) in the provisional stabilization of open tibial shaft fractures. Through retrospective analysis, the study found 445 patients who underwent operative fixation for tibial shaft fractures from 2008 to 2012. Twenty patients received DCP or EF before intramedullary nailing with a minimum follow-up of 3 months. Charts and radiographs were reviewed for postoperative complications. Hospital charges were reviewed for implant costs. Nine patients (45%) with DCP and 11 patients (55%) with EF were analyzed. There was no significant difference in the complication rates. The mean implant cost of DCP was $1028, whereas mean EF construct cost was $4204. Therefore, DCP resulted in significant cost savings with no difference in complication rates, making it a valuable alternative to EF for the provisional stabilization of open tibial shaft fractures.

Incidence and predictive risk factors of postoperative sepsis in orthopedic trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative sepsis is associated with high mortality and the national costs of septicemia exceed those of any other diagnosis. While numerous studies in the basic orthopedic science literature suggest that traumatic injuries facilitate the development of sepsis, it is currently unclear whether orthopedic trauma patients are at increased risk. The purpose of this study was thus to assess the incidence of sepsis and determine the risk factors that significantly predicted septicemia following orthopedic trauma surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 56,336 orthopedic trauma patients treated between 2006 and 2013 were identified in the ACS-NSQIP database. Documentation of postoperative sepsis/septic shock, demographics, surgical variables, and preoperative comorbidities was collected. Chi-squared analyses were used to assess differences in the rates of sepsis between trauma and nontrauma groups. Binary multivariable regressions identified risk factors that significantly predicted the development of postoperative septicemia in orthopedic trauma patients. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the overall rates of both sepsis and septic shock between orthopedic trauma (1.6%) and nontrauma (0.5%) patients (p < 0.001). For orthopedic trauma patients, ventilator use (OR = 15.1, p = 0.002), history of pain at rest (OR = 2.8, p = 0.036), and prior sepsis (OR = 2.6, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with septicemia. Statistically predictive, modifiable comorbidities included hypertension (OR = 2.1, p = 0.003) and the use of corticosteroids (OR = 2.1, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significantly greater incidence of postoperative sepsis in the trauma cohort. Clinicians should be aware of these predictive characteristics, may seek to counsel at-risk patients, and should consider addressing modifiable risk factors such as hypertension and corticosteroid use preoperatively. Level of evidence Level III.

Risk factors for adverse cardiac events in hip fracture patients: an analysis of NSQIP data.

PURPOSE: Cardiovascular complications constitute morbidity and mortality for hip fracture patients. Relatively little data exist exploring risk factors for post-operative complications. Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement (ACS-NSQIP) database, we identified significant risk factors associated with adverse cardiac events in hip fracture patients and provide recommendations for practising orthopaedists. METHODS: A cohort of 27,441 patients with hip fractures from 2006 to 2013 was identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Cardiac complications were defined as cardiac arrests or myocardial infarctions occurring within 30 days after surgery. Bivariate analysis was run on over 30 patient and surgical factors to determine significant associations with cardiac events. Multivariate logistical analysis was then performed to determine risk factors most predictive for cardiac events. RESULTS: Of the 27,441 hip fracture patients, 594 (2.2%) had cardiac complications within 30 days post-operatively. There was no significant association with respect to type of hip fracture surgery and adverse cardiac event rates (p = 0.545). After multivariate analysis, dialysis use (OR: 2.22, p = 0.026), and histories of peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.11, p = 0.016), stroke (OR: 1.83, p = 0.009), COPD (OR: 1.69, p = 0.014), and cardiac disease (OR: 1.55, p = 0.017) were significantly predictive of post-operative cardiac events in all hip fracture patients. CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic trauma surgeons should be aware of cardiac disease history and atherosclerotic conditions (PVD, stroke) in risk stratifying patients to prevent cardiac complications. Our recommendations to reduce cardiac events include simple pre-operative lab-work to full-fledged cardiac work-up and referrals to specific medicine disciplines based on the specific risk factors present.

Staged Columnar Fixation of Bicondylar Tibial Plateaus: A Cheaper Alternative to External Fixation.

The objective of this study was to compare complication rates and costs of staged columnar fixation (SCF) to external fixation for bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. Patients who received SCF or temporary external fixation across a 3-year period at a major level I trauma center underwent a retrospective chart review for associated complications. Fisher's exact analysis was used to determine any statistical difference in complication rates between both groups. However, there was no significant difference in complication rates between the SCF and external fixator groups. Average medial plate costs for SCF were $2131 compared with an average external fixator cost of $4070 (p < .0001). Given that all patients with external fixation undergo eventual medial and lateral plating, savings with SCF include $4070 plus operative costs for removing the fixator. As our health care system focuses on cost-cutting efforts, orthopaedic trauma surgeons must explore cheaper and equally effective treatment alternatives.

Locking Versus Nonlocking Implants in Isolated Lower Extremity Fractures: Analysis of Cost and Complications.

The purpose of this study was to investigate operative costs and postoperative complication rates in relation to utilization of locking versus nonlocking implants in isolated, lower limb fractures. Seventy-seven patients underwent plate fixation of isolated bicondylar tibial plateau, bimalleolar ankle, and trimalleolar ankle fractures at a large tertiary care center. Fixation with locking versus nonlocking implants was compared to incidence of postsurgical complications. Costs of these implants were directly compared. No significant correlation was found between locking versus nonlocking implants and incidence of complications. However, the cost of fixation with locking implants was significantly greater than nonlocking for all fractures. Utilization of more costly locking implants was not associated with reduced postoperative complications compared with nonlocking implants. More attention must be dedicated toward maximizing cost efficiency, since uniform usage of nonlocking implants has the potential to reduce surgical costs without compromising patient outcomes in isolated lower extremity fractures.

American Society of Anesthesiologists Score as a Predictive Tool to Optimize Blood Ordering for Intraoperative Transfusion in Orthopaedic Trauma Cases.

The objective of this study was to determine the clinical factors that are predictors for intraoperative transfusion in orthopaedic trauma patients. A retrospective chart review of patients admitted to a level I trauma center with isolated fractures was conducted. Variables such as gender, height, weight, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and medical comorbidities were assessed to determine likelihood of blood transfusion. A total of 1819 patients with isolated fractures were identified. ASA class was strongly associated with patients receiving intraoperative blood transfusion. For example, compared with patients with an ASA class I, patients with an ASA class IV were 14.71 times more likely to receive transfusion. Patients' ASA class is correlated with the need for intraoperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery for isolated fractures. Institutional or departmental maximum surgical blood order schedule algorithms could use patients' preoperative ASA class to determine whether blood transfusion will be necessary during procedures.

Impact of type of surgery on deep venous thrombi and pulmonary emboli: a look at twenty seven thousand hip fracture patients.

PURPOSE: Deep venous thrombi (DVT) and pulmonary emboli (PE) are common complications in hip fracture patients. It is imperative that orthopaedists know the patient risk factors for DVT and PE, including if type of surgery plays a role. To this end, we used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database to identify significant risk factors. METHODS: From the 2006-2011 ACS NSQIP database, 27,441 patients with hip fractures were identified using a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code search. DVT and PE complications, type of surgery based on CPT code, patient demographics, medical comorbidities and operative factors were identified for each patient. Fisher's exact tests were used to (1) determine if rates of DVT and PE significantly differed based on type of surgery and (2) identify significant associations between patient factors and development of DVT/PE. These significant factors were then used as covariates in multivariable analysis to determine which risk factors predicted postoperative DVT/PE. RESULTS: Of the 27,441 hip fracture patients, 449 (1.6 %) developed DVT/PE. There was a significant difference in rates of DVT/PE based on surgery (p = 0.015): patients undergoing intramedullary nailing of inter-/peri-/subtrochanteric femoral fractures had the highest rates of DVT/PE (2.06 %). After multivariate analysis, renal failure and recent surgery were significant risk factors for DVT/PE. CONCLUSIONS: This study was the first to show through large, multicentre, prospective data that type of hip fracture surgery impacts rates of DVT/PE. We further identified two additional risk factors orthopaedists should be aware of. Knowing these risk factors will help in peri-operative planning to reduce complications.

Asking for the 22-modifier in isolated ankle fractures: does the operative note make the case?

We evaluated the operative notes for justification on the use of the 22-modifier in ankle fracture cases and compared the differences in physician billing and reimbursement. A total of 265 patients who had undergone operative management of isolated ankle fractures across a 10-year period were identified at a level I trauma center through a retrospective chart review. Of the 265 patients, 61 (23.0%) had been billed with the 22-modifier. The radiographs were reviewed by 3 surgeons to determine the complexity of the case. The amount of the professional fees and payments was obtained from the financial services department. Operative reports were reviewed for inclusion of eight 22-modifier criteria and word count. Mann-Whitney U tests of means were used to compare cases with and without the 22-modifier. From our analysis of preoperative radiographs, 37 (60%) showed evidence of a significantly complex fracture that justified the use of the 22-modifier. A review of the operative reports showed that 42 (68%) did not identify 2 or more reasons for requesting the 22-modifier in the report. Overall, the 22-modifier cases were not always reimbursed significantly greater amounts than the nonmodifier cases. No significant difference in the average word count of the operative notes was found. We have concluded that orthopedic trauma surgeons do not appropriately justify the use of the 22-modifier within their operative report. Further education on modifiers and the use of the operative report as billing documentation is required to ensure surgeons are adequately reimbursed for difficult trauma cases.

Ankle Fractures and Modality of Hospital Transport at a Single Level 1 Trauma Center: Does Transport by Helicopter or Ground Ambulance Influence the Incidence of Complications?

In an era of concern over the rising cost of health care, cost-effectiveness of auxiliary services merits careful evaluation. We compared costs and benefits of Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) with Ground Emergency Medical Service (GEMS) in patients with an isolated ankle fracture. A medical record review was conducted for patients with an isolated ankle fracture who had been transported to a level 1 trauma center by either HEMS or GEMS from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010. We abstracted demographic data, fracture grade, complications, and transportation mode. Transportation costs were obtained by examining medical center financial records. A total of 303 patients was included in the analysis. Of 87 (28.71%) HEMS patients, 53 (60.92%) had sustained closed injuries and 34 (39.08%) had open injuries. Of the 216 (71.29%) GEMS patients, 156 (72.22%) had closed injuries and 60 (27.78%) had open injuries. No significant difference was seen between the groups regarding the percentage of patients with open fractures or the grade of the open fracture (p = .07). No significant difference in the rate of complications was found between the 2 groups (p = 18). The mean baseline cost to transport a patient via HEMS was $10,220 + a $108/mile surcharge, whereas the mean transport cost using GEMS was $976 per patient + $16/mile. Because the HEMS mode of emergency transport did not significantly improve patient outcomes, health systems should reconsider the use of HEMS for patients with isolated ankle fractures.

Relationship between the Charlson Comorbidity Index and cost of treating hip fractures: implications for bundled payment.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate how the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores contribute to increased length of stay (LOS) and healthcare costs in hip fracture patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Through retrospective analysis at an Urban level I trauma center, charts for all patients over the age of 60 years who presented with low-energy hip fracture were evaluated. 615 patients who underwent operative fixation of hip fracture or hemiarthroplasty secondary to hip fracture were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes search and included in the study. Data was collected on patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and hospitalization length; from this, the CCI score and the cost to the institution (with an average cost/day of inpatient stay of $4,530) were calculated. RESULTS: Multivariate linear regression analysis modeled the length of stay as a function of CCI score. Each unit increase in the CCI score corresponded to an increase in length of hospital stay and hospital costs incurred [effect size = 0.21; (0.0434-0.381); p = 0.014]. Patients with a CCI score of 2 (compared to a baseline CCI score of 0), on average, stayed 1.92 extra days in the hospital, and incurred $8,697.60 extra costs. CONCLUSIONS: The CCI score is associated with length of stay and hospital costs incurred following treatment for hip fracture. The CCI score may be a useful tool for risk assessment in bundled payment plans. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Distal tibia fractures and medial plating: factors influencing re-operation.

PURPOSE: We compared types of complications leading to re-operations in open and closed distal tibia fractures treated by locking or nonlocking medial plates. METHODS: Ninety-three patients from 2002 to 2012 who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and medial plating for distal extra-articular or partial articular tibia fractures were identified. Charts were retrospectively reviewed to determine the incidence of re-operation based on the type of complication that developed. Fisher's exact and chi-square tests were performed to analyze the incidence of complications based on injury and type of plate used. RESULTS: Thirty-three (35.5 %) patients required re-operations: 28.6 % (n = 16) with closed injuries had complications leading to re-operations compared with 45.9 % (n = 17) of patients with open injuries (p = 0.12). Patients with closed injuries were more likely to require re-operation due to hardware pain/prominence (p = 0.03), whereas patients with open injuries were more likely to require re-operation due to nonunion (p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in infection (p = 0.66) or malunion (p = 0.99) between groups. Locking plates showed higher costs but were not associated with decreased risk of re-operation. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high re-operation rate associated with distal tibia medial plating, with significant differences in the reason for re-operation between open versus closed groups. Complication rates were not influenced by the use of locking plates. Results of this study suggest that methods be considered to reduce re-operation based on type of fracture, such as early bone grafting or the use of alternate implants for open fractures.

Predictive factors of hospital length of stay in patients with operatively treated ankle fractures.

BACKGROUND: Operative fixation of ankle fractures is common. However, as reimbursement plans evolve with the potential for bundled payments, it is critical that orthopedic surgeons better understand factors influencing the postoperative length of stay (LOS) in patients undergoing these procedures to negotiate appropriate reimbursement. We sought to identify factors influencing the postoperative LOS in patients with operatively treated ankle fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six hundred twenty-two patients with ankle fractures between January 1st, 2004 and December 31st, 2010 were identified retrospectively. Charts were reviewed for gender, length of operative procedure, method of fixation, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score, medical comorbidities, and postoperative LOS. Both univariate and multivariate models were developed to determine predictors of patient LOS. Financial data for an average 24-h inpatient stay were obtained from financial services. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-two patients were included. In a linear regression analysis, a statistically significant relationship was demonstrated between ASA status and LOS (P < 0.001). Multiple regression analysis further characterized the relationship between ASA and LOS: a 1-U increase in ASA classification conferred a 3.42-day increase in LOS on average (P < 0.001). Based on an average per-day inpatient cost of $4,503, each unit increase in ASA status led to a $15,490 increase in cost. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that ASA status is a powerful predictor of LOS in patients undergoing operative fixation of ankle fractures. More complete understanding of these factors will lead to better risk adjustment models for measuring outcomes, determining fair reimbursement, and potential improvements to the efficiency of patient care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III retrospective comparative study regressing length of stay with many variables, including ASA physical status.

The evolution of advocacy and orthopaedic surgery.

BACKGROUND: The future direction of American health care has become increasingly controversial during the last decade. As healthcare costs, quality, and delivery have come under intense scrutiny, physicians play evolving roles as "advocates" for both their profession and patients via healthcare policy. Hospital-physician alignment is critical to the future success of advocacy among orthopaedic surgeons, as both hospitals and physicians are key stakeholders in health care and can work together to influence major health policy decisions. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We (1) define the role of advocacy in medicine, specifically within orthopaedic surgery; (2) explore the history of physician advocacy and its evolution; (3) examine the various avenues of involvement for orthopaedic surgeons interested in advocacy; and (4) reflect on the impact of such activities on the future of orthopaedic surgery as it relates to hospital-physician alignment. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive review of the literature through a bibliographic search of MEDLINE(®) and Google Scholar databases from January 2000 to December 2010 to identify articles related to advocacy and orthopaedic surgery. RESULTS: Advocacy among orthopaedic surgeons is critical in guiding the future of the American healthcare system. In today's world, advocacy necessitates a wider effort to improve healthcare access, quality, and delivery for patients on a larger scale. The nature of physician advocacy among orthopaedic surgeons is grounded in the desire to serve patients and alleviate their suffering. Participation in medical societies and political campaigns are two avenues of involvement. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing role of government in American health care will require a renewed commitment to advocacy efforts from orthopaedic surgeons. The role of advocacy is rapidly redefining the continuum of care to a trinity of clinical excellence, innovative research, and effective advocacy. Failure to recognize this growing role of advocacy limits the impact we can have for our patients.

Assessing the Accuracy of Estimated Lipoprotein(a) Cholesterol and Lipoprotein(a)-Free Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol.

Background Accurate measurement of the cholesterol within lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]-C) and its contribution to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) has important implications for risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, as well as in familial hypercholesterolemia. A method for estimating Lp(a)-C from particle number using fixed conversion factors has been proposed (Lp[a]-C from particle number divided by 2.4 for Lp(a) mass, multiplied by 30% for Lp[a]-C). The accuracy of this method, which theoretically can isolate "Lp(a)-free LDL-C," has not been validated. Methods and Results In 177 875 patients from the VLDbL (Very Large Database of Lipids), we compared estimated Lp(a)-C and Lp(a)-free LDL-C with measured values and quantified absolute and percent error. We compared findings with an analogous data set from the Mayo Clinic Laboratory. Error in estimated Lp(a)-C and Lp(a)-free LDL-C increased with higher Lp(a)-C values. Median error for estimated Lp(a)-C <10 mg/dL was -1.9 mg/dL (interquartile range, -4.0 to 0.2); this error increased linearly, overestimating by +30.8 mg/dL (interquartile range, 26.1-36.5) for estimated Lp(a)-C ≥50 mg/dL. This error relationship persisted after stratification by overall high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol subtypes. Similar findings were observed in the Mayo cohort. Absolute error for Lp(a)-free LDL-C was +2.4 (interquartile range, -0.6 to 5.3) for Lp(a)-C<10 mg/dL and -31.8 (interquartile range, -37.8 to -26.5) mg/dL for Lp(a)-C≥50 mg/dL. Conclusions Lp(a)-C estimations using fixed conversion factors overestimated Lp(a)-C and subsequently underestimated Lp(a)-free LDL-C, especially at clinically relevant Lp(a) values. Application of inaccurate Lp(a)-C estimations to correct LDL-C may lead to undertreatment of high-risk patients.

Utility of non-HDL-C and apoB targets in the context of new more aggressive lipid guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: Major guidelines recommend the use of secondary targets, such as non-HDL-C and apoB, to further reduce cardiovascular risk. We aimed to evaluate the proportion at which newer, more aggressive secondary lipid targets are exceeded in patients with LDL-C < 70 mg/dL estimated by Friedewald (LDLf-C) and Martin/Hopkins equations (LDLm-C). METHODS: We analyzed patients from the Very Large Database of Lipids with fasting lipids and estimated LDL-C <70 mg/dL by the Friedewald equation and Martin/Hopkins algorithm. Patients were categorized into three groups: LDL-C <40, 40-54 and 55-69 mg/dL. We calculated the proportion of patients with non-HDL-C and apoB above high-risk targets (non-HDL-C ≥ 100 and apoB ≥ 80mg/dL) for those with LDL-C 55-69 mg/dL and very high-risk targets (non-HDL-C ≥ 85 and apoB ≥ 65mg/dL) for those with LDL-C < 40 mg/dL and 40-54 mg/dL. RESULTS: In patients with LDLf-C < 40 mg/dL, ~8 and ~4% did not meet high-risk secondary targets and ~21 and 25% did not meet very high-risk secondary targets for non-HDL-C and apoB, respectively. However, in patients with LDLm-C < 40 mg/dL <1% did not meet high-risk targets, while only 3% did not meet the very-high risk secondary target for apoB and none exceeded the very-high risk secondary target for non-HDL-C. Among individuals with LDL-C< 40 mg/dL, there were increasing proportions of individuals not meeting the very high-risk secondary apoB target at greater triglyceride levels, reaching up to ~19% using LDLm-C compared to ~60% using LDLf-C when triglyceride levels were 200-399 mg/dL. There were higher proportions of individuals not meeting high and very-high risk targets as triglyceride levels increased among those with LDL-C 40-54 and 55-69 mg/dL. CONCLUSION: In a large, US cross-sectional sample of individuals with LDL-C < 70 mg/dL, secondary non-HDL-C and apoB targets overall provide modest utility. However, attainment of very high-risk cutpoints for non-HDL-C and apoB is not achieved in a significant fraction of patients with triglycerides 200-399 mg/dL, even when using a more accurate calculation of LDL-C.