The Interval of Two-Stage Bilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty under Enhanced Recovery Affects Perioperative Complications and Cost of Hospitalization: A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols can improve the quality of healthcare and reduce hospitalization for patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA). The interval of staged bilateral THA under ERAS is still unclear. We attempt to ascertain the optimal interval of staged bilateral THA for reducing the perioperative complications and the cost of hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who received staged bilateral THA under ERAS performed at West China Hospital of Sichuan University from 2018 to 2021. The staged time was divided into two groups using four different cutoff points: (1) ≤3 months versus >3 months, (2) ≤4 months versus >4 months, (3) ≤5 months versus >5 months and (4) ≤6 months versus >6 months. Primary outcomes included the rate of perioperative complications and the cost of hospitalization. The secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay (LOS), the rates of transfusion and albumin (Alb) administration, hemoglobin (Hb) decrease and serum Alb decrease. The categorical variables were compared using chi-squared and/or two-tailed Fisher's exact tests, whereas continuous variables were compared using two-tailed independent t-tests, the continuous variables which were asymmetrical distributions used a Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: With the application of ERAS, the rate of perioperative complications in the >5 months group was significantly lower than that in the ≤5 months group (13/195 vs. 45/307, p < 0.05). Concerning the cost of hospitalization, the >5 monthly intervals spent significantly less than the ≤5 monthly intervals ($ 8695.91 vs. $ 8919.71, p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was found for secondary outcomes such as the rate of transfusions and Alb administrations or decreases of Hb and Alb in the 5 months threshold. CONCLUSIONS: More than 5 months maybe a reasonable period to perform the first contralateral THA under ERAS regarding the rate of perioperative complications and the cost of hospitalization. However, more high-quality research will include a larger sample size in the future to validate the appropriate time of staged bilateral THA.

Blood loss and cost-effectiveness of oral vs intravenous tranexamic acid in primary total hip arthroplasty: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: To assess the blood loss and cost-effectiveness of the oral and intravenous (IV) administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) for the treatment of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: From January 2017 to August 2017, 100 patients undergoing primary THA were enrolled and randomly divided into two groups. In the oral TXA group (N = 50), 1 g of TXA (2 tablets of 500 mg) was given 2 h before the incision, and the same dose was repeated 3 h and 6 h postoperatively. In the IV TXA group (N = 50), 1 g of TXA was administered 10 min before the incision, and the same dose was repeated 3 h and 6 h postoperatively. The total follow-up period was 6 months. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in total blood loss (863.3 ±â€¯272.5 mL and 886.1 ±â€¯200.2 mL, P = 0.66), maximum Hb drop (2.9 ±â€¯0.6 g/dl and 3.1 ±â€¯0.8 g/dl, P = 0.17), maximum Hct drop (7.4 ±â€¯2.1% and 7.7 ±â€¯1.8%, P = 0.48), transfusion rates (1 and 2, P = 1.00) and transfusion units (1.5 u and 3 u, P = 0.56) between the two groups. However, the costs of TXA in the oral group were significantly lower than those in the IV TXA group (¥600 and ¥3150, P < 0.01). There was no difference in the Hb levels on postoperative days 1 and 3. No significant differences were found for operating time, hospital length of stay, DVT and/or PE, and wound complications in the postoperative follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that the oral and IV administration of TXA in patients undergoing THA was proved to be an equivalent and effective method in reducing blood loss and transfusion rates. However, oral TXA is more cost-effectiveness than IV TXA, and it may be an alternative to the IV form.