Multicenter, retrospective comparison of implant survival, complications and cost between plate and screw and intramedullary nail fixation for metastatic lesions of the diaphyseal humerus.

Background: The humerus is a common site of metastatic disease that can be fixated with either plate and screw or intramedullary nail (IMN) constructs. A multicenter retrospective comparison study was undertaken to compare implant survival, complication rate and cost between the two constructs. No prior studies have included a cost comparison. Methods: Databases of two academic practices were queried retrospectively to identify patients with metastases of the humerus. Inclusion criteria were a lesion in the proximal metaphysis to distal diaphysis and amenable to both implant options with available cost data. Follow-up was at least 6 months barring death or discharge to hospice sooner. Demographic, clinical and outcome data was recorded. Costs were estimated based on contract pricing. Operating room (OR) costs were estimated using per minute OR costs proposed by other investigators. Results: One hundred and one humeri in 96 patients were included (72 plates and 29 nails). The most common malignancies were renal cell, myeloma and lung. Half presented with a displaced fracture. Demographics were similar in both groups. Lesions were larger in the plate group. Surgical times were longer in the plate group, 146 vs. 75 min, P<0.001. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was higher in the plate group, 510 vs. 221 mL, P<0.001. A trend toward increased failure was seen in the plate group, 12.5% vs. 0% (P=0.056). The most common complications in the plate group were pain, stiffness and swelling compared to pain, refracture and PE in the nail group. Local disease progression was equivalent. Implant costs were higher in the IMN group ($2,753 vs. $1,553, P<0.001), while OR costs were lower ($2,349 vs. $4,395, P<0.001). Overall cost of implantation was lower in the IMN group ($5,102 vs. $5,949, P=0.005). Conclusions: IMN of metastases of the humerus offers a faster, potentially more durable construct with lower blood loss, faster OR times and decreased cost of implantation.

The Utility of Preoperative Labs in Predicting Postoperative Complications Following Primary Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative testing costs billions of dollars despite little evidence supporting its utility. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between abnormal preoperative laboratory tests and postoperative complications following total joint arthroplasty. METHODS: The NSQIP database was used to identify 45,936 primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 76,041 pri-mary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) cases performed between 2006 and 2013. Complications within 30 days of surgery were collected and multivariable regression modeling was performed incorporating all significant laboratory values as well as demographics and preoperative comorbidities. RESULTS: For THA patients, abnormal sodium (p = 0.016, OR = 1.89), white count (p = 0.043, OR = 1.73), and partial thromboplastin time (p = 0.028, OR = 1.43) were significantly associated with complications. For TKA patients, abnormal alkaline phosphatase (p = 0.04, OR = 2.12), creatinine (p = 0.003, OR = 1.56), and INR (p = 0.008, OR = 1.99) were significantly predictive of complications. CONCLUSION: Of the 13 laboratory values, only six were significantly associated with complications. These findings may have implications for risk stratification in the inpatient setting.

Cost-utility of osteoarticular allograft versus endoprosthetic reconstruction for primary bone sarcoma of the knee: A markov analysis.

BACKGROUND: The most cost-effective reconstruction after resection of bone sarcoma is unknown. The goal of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of osteoarticular allograft to endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal tibia or distal femur. METHODS: A Markov model was used. Revision and complication rates were taken from existing studies. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates and implant prices. Health-state utilities were derived from the Health Utilities Index 3 survey with additional assumptions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were used with less than $100 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) considered cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses were performed for comparison over a range of costs, utilities, complication rates, and revisions rates. RESULTS: Osteoarticular allografts, and a 30% price-discounted endoprosthesis were cost-effective with ICERs of $92.59 and $6 114.77. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed discounted endoprostheses were favored if allografts cost over $21 900 or endoprostheses cost less than $51 900. Allograft reconstruction was favored over discounted endoprosthetic reconstruction if the allograft complication rate was less than 1.3%. Allografts were more cost-effective than full-price endoprostheses. CONCLUSIONS: Osteoarticular allografts and price-discounted endoprosthetic reconstructions are cost-effective. Sensitivity analysis, using plausible complication and revision rates, favored the use of discounted endoprostheses over allografts. Allografts are more cost-effective than full-price endoprostheses.

Overutilization and Cost of Advanced Imaging for Long-Bone Cartilaginous Lesions.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and cost of unnecessary advanced imaging studies (AIS) in the evaluation of long bone cartilaginous lesions have not been studied previously. METHODS: A total of 105 enchondromas and 19 chondrosarcomas arising in long bones from July 2008 until April 2012 in 121 patients were reviewed. Advanced imaging was defined as MRI, CT, bone scan, skeletal survey, or CT biopsy. Two blinded radiologists independently reviewed the initial imaging study and determined if further imaging was indicated based on that imaging study alone. The cost of imaging was taken from our institution's global charge list. Imaging was deemed unnecessary if it was not recommended by our radiologists after review of the initial imaging study. The difference in cost was calculated by subtracting the cost of imaging recommended by each radiologist from the cost of unnecessary imaging. The sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing enchondromas from chondrosarcomas was calculated. A minimum of 2 years from diagnosis of an enchondroma was required to monitor for malignant transformation. RESULTS: Of patients diagnosed with an enchondroma, 85 % presented with AIS. The average enchondroma patient presented with one unnecessary AIS. The radiologists' interpretations agreed 85 % of the time for enchondromas and 100 % for chondrosarcomas. The sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing enchondromas from chondrosarcomas was 95 % for one radiologist and 87 and 95 % for the other. The average unnecessary cost per enchondroma patient was $1,346.18. CONCLUSIONS: Unnecessary AIS are frequently performed and are a significant source of expense. The imaging algorithms outlined in this study may reduce unnecessary AIS.

Racial Disparities in Extremity Soft-Tissue Sarcoma Outcomes: A Nationwide Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in access and survival have been reported in a variety of cancers. These issues, however, have yet to be explored in detail in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas (STS). The purpose of this paper was to investigate the independent role of race with respect to survival outcomes in STS. METHODS: A total of 7601 patients were evaluated in this study. A SEER registry query for patients over 20 years old with extremity STS diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 (n=7225) was performed. Survival outcomes were analyzed after patients were stratified by race. Multivariable survival models were used to identify independent predictors of sarcoma-specific death. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare continuous variables. Statistical significance was maintained at P<0.05. RESULTS: This study showed that African American patients were more likely to die of their STS. They were younger at presentation (P=0.001), had larger tumors (P<0.001), had less surgery (P=0.002), received radiotherapy less frequently (P=0.024), had higher family income (P<0.001), and were less likely to be married (P<0.001). African American race by itself was not an independent predictor of death. CONCLUSIONS: African Americans encounter death due to STS at a much larger proportion and faster rate than their respective white counterparts. African Americans frequently present with a larger size tumor, do not undergo surgical resection, or receive radiation therapy as frequently as compared with their white peers. Barriers to timely and appropriate care should be further investigated in this group of at-risk patients.

Incomplete excisions of extremity soft tissue sarcomas are unaffected by insurance status or distance from a sarcoma center.

BACKGROUND: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) continue to be excised inappropriately without proper preoperative planning. The reasons for this remain elusive. The role of insurance status and patient distance from sarcoma center in influencing such inappropriate excisions were examined in this study. METHODS: This retrospective review of a single institution prospective database evaluated 400 patients treated for STS of the extremities between January 2000 and December 2008. Two hundred fifty three patients had a primary excision while 147 patients underwent re-excision. Wilcoxon rank sum test and either χ(2) or Fisher's exact were used to compare variables. Multivariable regression analyses were used to take into account potential confounders and identify variables that affected excision status. RESULTS: Tumor size, site, depth, stage, margins, and histology were significantly different between the primary excision and re-excision groups; P < 0.05. Insurance status and patient distance from the treatment center were not statistically different between the two groups. Large and deep tumors and certain histology types predicted appropriate referral. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate excision of STS is not influenced by patient distance from a sarcoma center or by a patient's insurance status. In this study, tumor size, depth, and certain histology types predicted the appropriate referral of a STS to a sarcoma center.

What is the current status of global health activities and opportunities in US orthopaedic residency programs?

BACKGROUND: Interest in developing national health care has been increasing in many fields of medicine, including orthopaedics. One manifestation of this interest has been the development of global health opportunities during residency training. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We assessed global health activities and opportunities in orthopaedic residency in terms of resident involvement, program characteristics, sources of funding and support, partner site relationships and geography, and program director opinions on global health participation and the associated barriers. METHODS: An anonymous 24-question survey was circulated to all US orthopaedic surgery residency program directors (n = 153) by email. Five reminder emails were distributed over the next 7 weeks. A total of 59% (n = 90) program directors responded. RESULTS: Sixty-one percent of responding orthopaedic residencies facilitated clinical experiences in developing countries. Program characteristics varied, but most used clinical rotation or elective time for travel (76%), which most frequently occurred during Postgraduate Year 4 (57%) and was used to provide pediatric (66%) or trauma (60%) care. The majority of programs (59%) provided at least some funding to traveling residents and sent accompanying attendings on all ventures (56%). Travel was most commonly within North America (85%), and 51% of participating programs have established international partner sites although only 11% have hosted surgeons from those partnerships. Sixty-nine percent of residency directors believed global health experiences during residency shape future volunteer efforts, 39% believed such opportunities help attract residents to a training program, and the major perceived challenges were funding (73%), faculty time (53%), and logistical planning (43%). CONCLUSIONS: Global health interest and activity are common among orthopaedic residency programs. There is diversity in the characteristics and geographical locations of such activity, although some consensus does exist among program directors around funding and faculty time as the largest challenges.

The financial burden of reexcising incompletely excised soft tissue sarcomas: a cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although survival outcomes have been evaluated between those undergoing a planned primary excision and those undergoing a reexcision following an unplanned resection, the financial implications associated with a reexcision have yet to be elucidated. METHODS: A query for financial data (professional, technical, indirect charges) for soft tissue sarcoma excisions from 2005 to 2008 was performed. A total of 304 patients (200 primary excisions and 104 reexcisions) were identified. Wilcoxon rank sum tests and χ2 or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare differences in demographics and tumor characteristics. Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed with bootstrapping techniques. RESULTS: The average professional charge for a primary excision was $9,694 and $12,896 for a reexcision (p<.001). After adjusting for tumor size, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, grade, and site, patients undergoing reexcision saw an increase of $3,699 in professional charges more than those with a primary excision (p<.001). Although every 1-cm increase in size of the tumor results in an increase of $148 for a primary excision (p=.006), size was not an independent factor in affecting reexcision charges. The grade of the tumor was positively associated with professional charges of both groups such that higher-grade tumors resulted in higher charges compared to lower-grade tumors (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Reexcision of an incompletely excised sarcoma results in significantly higher professional charges when compared to a single, planned complete excision. Additionally, when the cost of the primary unplanned surgery is considered, the financial burden nearly doubles.

Pelvic discontinuity treated with custom triflange component: a reliable option.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic discontinuity is an increasingly common complication of THA. Treatments of this complex situation are varied, including cup-cage constructs, acetabular allografts with plating, pelvic distraction technique, and custom triflange acetabular components. It is unclear whether any of these offer substantial advantages. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore determined (1) revision and overall survival rates, (2) discontinuity healing rate, and (3) Harris hip score (HHS) after treatment of pelvic discontinuity with a custom triflange acetabular component and (4) the cost of this reconstructive operation compared to other constructs. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 57 patients with pelvic discontinuity treated with revision THA using a custom triflange acetabular component. We reviewed operative reports, radiographs, and clinical data for clinical and radiographic results. We also performed a cost comparison with utilization of other techniques. Minimum followup was 24 months (average, 65 months; range, 24-215 months). RESULTS: Fifty-six of 57 (98%) were free of revision for aseptic loosening at latest followup. Fifty-four (95%) were free of revision of the triflange component for any reason. Thirty-seven (65%) were free of revision for any reason. Twenty-eight (49%) were free of revision for any reason and free of any component migration and had a healed discontinuity. Forty-six (81%) had a stable triflange component with a healed pelvic discontinuity. Average HHS was 74.8. The costs of the custom triflange implants and a Trabecular Metal cup-cage construct were equivalent: $12,500 and $11,250, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this group of patients with osteolytic pelvic discontinuity, triflange implants provided predictable mid-term fixation at a cost equivalent to other treatment methods. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Level-adjusted perioperative risk of sacral amputations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Sacral amputations above the S2 body often involve increased surgical complexity leading to long-term morbidity. The purpose of this study was to determine whether proximal sacral amputations have substantially higher perioperative morbidity compared with more distal sacral amputations. METHODS: We evaluated the effect of sacral amputation level on perioperative outcomes within 90 days of surgery. Outcome measures included blood loss, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay, hospital cost, and incidence of a major and minor morbidity. Survival analyses were adjusted for the level of resection and histological appearance. RESULTS: Thirteen proximal and 14 distal resections were performed. In comparing proximal versus distal resections, median estimated blood loss was 4 L versus 1 L (P < 0.001), ICU stay was 4 days versus 0 days (P = 0.012), hospital stay was 19 days versus 8 days (P = 0.001), hospital cost was 28,800 dollars versus 7,500 dollars (P = 0.003), with one or more major complications in 85% versus 29% (P = 0.011). Survival analysis demonstrated that the sacral resection level did not influence survival (P = 0.936), whereas the type of tumor did influence survival (P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Tumor resections above S2 demonstrate increased perioperative morbidity, suggesting that proximal osteotomies be reserved for patients with a realistic cure potential.