Association Between Bio-Fermentation Derived Hyaluronic Acid and Healthcare Costs Following Knee Arthroplasty.

Background: Limiting access to intra-articular knee injections, including hyaluronic acid (HA), has been advocated as a cost-containment measure in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. The association between presurgical injections and post-surgical complications such as early periprosthetic joint infection and revision remained to be investigated. This study evaluated pre- and post-surgical costs and rates of post-surgical complications in knee arthroplasty (KA) patients with or without prior HA use. Methods: Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Claims Data (IBM MarketScan Research Databases) from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018 were used to identify unilateral KA patients. Those who completed a course of bio-fermentation derived HA (Bio-HA) as the first-line HA therapy comprised of the test group (n = 4091), while the control group did not use HA prior to KA (n = 118,659). Using multivariable regression with propensity score (PS) weighting, overall healthcare costs, readmission rates, and revision rates were assessed at six months following KA. Results: Healthcare costs following KA were significantly lower for the Bio-HA group ($10,021 ± $22,796) than No HA group ($12,724 ± $32,966; PS p < 0.001). Bio-HA patients had lower readmission rates (8.9% vs 14.0%; PS p < 0.001) and inpatient costs per readmitted patient ($43,846 ± $50,648 vs $50,533 ± $66,150; PS p = 0.005). There were no differences in revision rate for any reason (Bio-HA: 0.78% vs No HA: 0.67%; PS p = 0.361) and with PJI (Bio-HA: 0.42% vs No HA: 0.33%; PS p = 0.192). Costs in the six months up to and including the KA were similar for both groups (Bio-HA: $49,759 ± $40,363 vs No HA: $50,532 ± $43,183; PS p = 0.293). Conclusion: Bio-HA use prior to knee arthroplasty did not appear to increase overall healthcare costs in the six months before and after surgery. Allowing access to HA injections provides a non-surgical therapeutic option without increasing cost or risk of post-surgical complications.

Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment Costs in the Medicare Patient Population.

BACKGROUND: Several nonoperative options have been recommended for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA), with varying degrees of evidence. Adhering to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons clinical practice guidelines has been suggested to decrease direct treatment costs by 45% in the year before knee arthroplasty, but this does not consider the cost of the entire episode of care, including the cost of surgery and postsurgery care. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the total treatment costs after a diagnosis of knee OA, as well as the proportion of arthroplasty interventions as part of the total knee OA-related costs, and whether the total costs differed for patients who received intra-articular hyaluronic acid and/or had knee arthroplasty. METHODS: We identified patients newly diagnosed with knee OA using the 5% Medicare data sample from January 2010 to December 2015. Patients were excluded if they were aged <65 years, had incomplete claim history, did not reside in any of the 50 states, had claim history <12 months before knee OA diagnosis, or did not enroll in Medicare Part A and Part B. The study analyzed knee OA-related costs from a payer perspective in terms of reimbursements provided by Medicare, as well as the time from the diagnosis of knee OA to knee arthroplasty for patients who had knee arthroplasty, and the time from the first hyaluronic acid injection to knee arthroplasty for those who received the injection. We compared patients who received hyaluronic acid and those who did not receive hyaluronic acid injections. Patients who received hyaluronic acid injection who subsequently had knee arthroplasty were also compared with those who did not have subsequent knee arthroplasty. RESULTS: Of the 275,256 patients with knee OA, 45,801 (16.6%) received a hyaluronic acid injection and 35,465 (12.9%) had knee arthroplasty during the study period. The median time to knee arthroplasty was 16.4 months for patients who received hyaluronic acid versus 5.7 months for those who did not receive hyaluronic acid. Non-arthroplasty-related therapies and knee arthroplasty accounted for similar proportions of knee OA-related costs, with hyaluronic acid injection comprising 5.6% of the total knee OA-related costs. For patients who received hyaluronic acid injections and subsequently had knee arthroplasty, hyaluronic acid injection contributed 1.8% of the knee OA-related costs versus 76.6% of the cost from knee arthroplasty. Patients who received hyaluronic acid injections and did not have knee arthroplasty incurred less than 10% of the knee OA-related costs that patients who had surgery incurred. CONCLUSION: Although limiting hyaluronic acid use may reduce the knee OA-related costs, in this study hyaluronic acid injection only comprised a small fraction of the overall costs related to knee OA. Among patients who had knee arthroplasty, those who received treatment with hyaluronic acid had surgery delayed by a median of 10.7 months and associated costs for a significant period. The ability to delay or avoid knee arthroplasty altogether can have a substantial impact on healthcare costs.

Knee OA cost comparison for hyaluronic acid and knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Limiting treatment to those recommended by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeon Clinical Practice Guidelines has been suggested to decrease costs by 45% in the year prior to total knee arthroplasty, but this only focuses on expenditures leading up to, but not including, the surgery and not the entire episode of care. We evaluated the treatment costs following knee osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis and determined whether these are different for patients who use intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) and/or knee arthroplasty. METHODS: Claims data from a large commercial database containing de-identified data of more than 100 million patients with continuous coverage from 2012 to 2016 was used to evaluate the cumulative cost of care for over 2 million de-identified members with knee OA over a 4.5-year period between 2011 and 2015. Median cumulative costs were then stratified for patients with or without HA and/or knee arthroplasty. RESULTS: Knee OA treatment costs for 1,567,024 patients over the 4.5-year period was $6.60 billion (mean $4210/patient) as calculated by the authors. HA and knee arthroplasty accounted for 3.0 and 61.5% of the overall costs, respectively. For patients who underwent knee arthroplasty, a spike in median costs occurred sooner for patients without HA use (around the 5- to 6-month time point) compared to patients treated with HA (around the 16- to 17-month time point). CONCLUSIONS: Non-arthroplasty therapies, as calculated by the authors, accounted for about one third of the costs in treating knee OA in our cohort. Although some have theorized that limiting the use of HA may reduce the costs of OA treatment, HA only comprised a small fraction (3%) of the overall costs. Among patients who underwent knee arthroplasty, those treated with HA experienced elevated costs from the surgery later than those without HA, which reflects their longer time to undergoing knee arthroplasty. The ability to delay or avoid knee arthroplasty altogether can have a substantial impact on the cost to the healthcare system.

Addition of High Molecular Weight Hyaluronic Acid to Fibroblast-Like Stromal Cells Modulates Endogenous Hyaluronic Acid Metabolism and Enhances Proteolytic Processing and Secretion of Versican.

We have examined the effect of exogenous linear chain high molecular weight hyaluronic acid (HMW HA) on endogenously synthesized hyaluronic acid (HA) and associated binding proteins in primary cultures of fibroblast-like stromal cells that were obtained by collagenase digestion of the murine peripatellar fat pad. The cultures were expanded in DMEM that was supplemented with fetal bovine serum and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) then exposed to macrophage-colony-stimulating factor (MCSF) to induce macrophage properties, before activation of inflammatory pathways using E. coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Under all culture conditions, a significant amount of endogenously synthesized HA localized in LAMP1-positive lysosomal vesicles. However, this intracellular pool was depleted after the addition of exogenous HMW HA and was accompanied by enhanced proteolytic processing and secretion of de novo synthesized versican, much of which was associated with endosomal compartments. No changes were detected in synthesis, secretion, or proteolytic processing of aggrecan or lubricin (PRG4). The addition of HMW HA also modulated a range of LPS-affected genes in the TLR signaling and phagocytosis pathways, as well as endogenous HA metabolism genes, such as Has1, Hyal1, Hyal2, and Tmem2. However, there was no evidence for association of endogenous or exogenous HMW HA with cell surface CD44, TLR2 or TLR4 protein, suggesting that its physiochemical effects on pericelluar pH and/or ionic strength might be the primary modulators of signal transduction and vesicular trafficking by this cell type. We discuss the implications of these findings in terms of a potential in vivo effect of therapeutically applied HMW HA on the modification of osteoarthritis-related joint pathologies, such as pro-inflammatory and degradative responses of multipotent mesenchymal cells residing in the synovial membrane, the underlying adipose tissue, and the articular cartilage surface.

Viscosupplementation may preserve tibial cartilage and collagen in osteoarthritis: findings from a preclinical model of osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: Intraarticular (IA) hyaluronic acid (HA) injection is used to reduce pain and improve mobility in knee osteoarthritis (OA). Little is known about histopathological changes underlying HA efficacy. This study investigated dose-related effects of 1% sodium hyaluronate (BioHA) on knee joint histopathology and pain responses in a medial meniscal tear (MMT) rat model of OA. METHODS: Following MMT surgery, rats were randomized into treatment groups: single IA injection of vehicle, BioHA, or an avian-derived hyaluronic acid (hylan G-F 20) on Day 7; or 3 weekly injections of vehicle or BioHA on Days 7, 14, and 21. On Day 35, joints were evaluated by microscopic histopathology for cartilage degeneration, collagen degeneration, synovitis, and cytokine expression (tumor necrosis factor α, transforming growth factor ß). RESULTS: Joint pathology for control animals was consistent with that expected for the MMT model. Rats treated with 3 injections of IA-BioHA had significantly reduced collagen degeneration (21%) relative to control animals. No significant change in collagen degeneration was observed for rats given a single injection of hylan G-F 20 or IA-BioHA compared to control animals. HA treatment did not affect cytokine expression. CONCLUSIONS: IA-BioHA viscosupplementation in a rat MMT model of OA showed preservation of joint cartilage and collagen. This effect was most pronounced on tibial surfaces having less severe injury, suggesting that treatment should be initiated early in the disease process. A comparison of responses to IA-BioHA or hylan G-F 20 in the MMT rat OA model suggest IA-BioHA may be more effective in preserving joint connective tissue.