Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio as an Indicator of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is a serious complication posing notable clinical implications for patients and substantial economic burdens. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is an emerging biomarker of inflammation, which may better predict PJI. The objective of this review was to evaluate NLR changes in patients with confirmed PJI, to compare NLR between an aseptic revision and a revision for PJI, and to establish whether an NLR of 2.45 is an appropriate cutoff for predicting infection. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent revision TJA for PJI at a single center between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2018, was performed and compared with an aseptic cohort who underwent aseptic revision TJA. NLR was calculated from complete blood counts performed at index surgery and at the time of revision surgery. Receiver operating characteristic curves were analyzed, along with sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. RESULTS: There were 89 patients included in each cohort. Mean NLR in patients who underwent revision for PJI was 2.85 (± 1.27) at the time of index surgery and 6.89 (± 6.64) at the time of revision surgery ( P = 0.017). Mean NLR in patients undergoing revision for PJI (6.89) was significantly higher than aseptic revisions (3.17; P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: In patients who underwent revision surgery for PJI, NLR was markedly elevated at time of revision compared with the time of index surgery. Because it is a cost-effective and readily available test, these findings suggest that NLR may be a useful triage test in the diagnosis of PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Diagnostic Study.

Routine use of antibiotic-laden bone cement in total knee arthroplasty is a cost-effective practice in the single-payer healthcare system.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic-laden bone cement (ALBC) in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the perspective of a single-payer healthcare system. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed over a 2-year time horizon comparing primary TKA with either ALBC or regular bone cement (RBC) from the perspective of the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. All costs were in 2020 Canadian dollars. Health utilities were in the form of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Model inputs for cost, utilities and probabilities were derived from the literature as well as regional and national databases. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Primary TKA with ALBC was found to be more cost-effective compared to primary TKA with RBC with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of -3,637.79 CAD/QALY. The use of routine ALBC remained cost-effective even with cost increases of up to 50% per bag of ALBC. TKA with ALBC was no longer cost-effective if the rate of PJI following this practice increased 52%, or the rate of PJI following the use of RBC decreased 27%. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of ALBC in TKA is a cost-effective practice in the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. This remains to be the case even with a 50% increase in the cost of ALBC. Policy makers and hospital administrators of single-payer healthcare systems can leverage this model to inform their local funding policies. Future prospective reviews and randomized controlled trials from the perspective of various healthcare models can further shed light on this issue. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Use of the Corail stem for revision total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of clinical outcomes and cost

Background: With the growing number of total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures performed, revision surgery is also proportionately increasing, resulting in greater health care expenditures. The purpose of this study was to assess clinical outcomes and cost when using a collared, fully hydroxyapatite-coated primary femoral stem for revision THA compared to commonly used revision femoral stems. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients who underwent revision THA with a primary stem between 2011 and 2016 and matched them on demographic variables and reason for revision to a similar cohort who underwent revision THA. We extracted operative data and information on in-hospital resource use from the patients' charts to calculate average cost per procedure. Patient-reported outcomes were recorded preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Results: We included 20 patients in our analysis, of whom 10 received a primary stem and 10, a typical revision stem. There were no significant between-group differences in mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, Harris Hip Score, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) Mental Composite Scale score or Physical Composite Scale score at 1 year. Operative time was significantly shorter and total cost was significantly lower (mean difference ­3707.64, 95% confidence interval ­5532.85 to ­1882.43) with a primary stem than with other revision femoral stems. Conclusion: We found similar clinical outcomes and significant institutional cost savings with a primary femoral stem in revision THA. This suggests a role for a primary femoral stem such as a collared, fully hydroxyapatite-coated stem for revision THA.

Contexte: Avec le nombre croissant d'interventions pour prothèse de hanche (PTH) effectuées, la chirurgie de révision est aussi proportionnellement en hausse, ce qui entraîne des coûts supérieurs pour le système de santé. Le but de cette étude était d'évaluer les résultats cliniques et le coût associés à l'emploi d'une prothèse fémorale primaire à collerette entièrement recouverte d'hydroxyapatite pour la révision de PTH, comparativement à d'autres prothèses d'usage courant utilisées pour les révisions. Méthodes: Nous avons identifié rétrospectivement les patients ayant subi une révision de PTH avec une prothèse primaire entre 2011 et 2016 et nous les avons assortis selon les caractéristiques démographiques et le motif de la révision à une cohorte similaire soumise à une révision de PTH. Nous avons extrait les données sur l'opération et sur l'utilisation des ressources hospitalières à partir des dossiers des patients pour calculer le coût par intervention. Les résultats déclarés par les patients ont été notés avant l'intervention et 1 an après. Résultats: Nous avons inclus 20 patients dans notre analyse, dont 10 ont reçu une prothèse primaire et 10, une révision de prothèse typique. On n'a noté aucune différence significative entre les groupes pour ce qui est du score WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) moyen pour l'arthrose, du score de Harris pour la hanche, ou des sous-échelles santé mentale ou santé physique à 1 an du questionnaire SF-12 (12-Item Short Form Health Survey). L'intervention a duré significativement moins longtemps et le coût a été significativement moindre (différence moyenne ­3707,64, intervalle de confiance de 95 % ­5532,85 à ­1882,43) avec une prothèse primaire qu'avec les autres prothèses de révision. Conclusion: Nous avons observé des résultats cliniques similaires et des économies significatives pour l'établissement avec la prothèse primaire utilisée pour la révision de PTH. Cela donne à penser que la prothèse fémorale primaire, par exemple, à collerette et entièrement recouverte d'hydroxyapatite, aurait un rôle à jouer pour la révision de PTH.

Synthetic Graft Compared With Allograft Reconstruction for Extensor Mechanism Disruption in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Extensor mechanism disruption after total knee arthroplasty is a serious complication leading to notable patient morbidity. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of extensor mechanism allograft with synthetic graft reconstruction. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent extensor mechanism reconstruction using either allograft or synthetic graft from two high-volume academic arthroplasty institutions between 2006 and 2017. We collected extensor lag, need for ambulatory aids, and patient-reported outcome measures, as well as the incidence of postoperative complications and revision surgeries. We evaluated cost differences, considering both material cost and the need for revision surgery. RESULTS: We identified 27 cases. A significantly greater postoperative extensor lag was found in the allograft group (P = 0.05). Graft failure after synthetic reconstruction was zero, with an overall revision surgery rate of 15%. Graft failure was 21%, and the revision surgery rate was 43% after allograft reconstruction. The allograft cost was significantly higher compared with the synthetic graft cost (P = 0.001). The mean total cost was 4,733.08 CAD for the synthetic group and 24,050.40 CAD for the allograft group (P = 0.17). DISCUSSION: Synthetic reconstruction for extensor mechanism disruption shows benefit in postoperative extensor lag, graft failure, revision surgery, and cost when compared with allograft. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.