Evidence-Based Hospital Procedural Volumes as Predictors of Outcomes After Revision Hip Arthroplasty

Does hospital setting influence shoulder replacement revision rate? A national comparison of outcomes between private and public settings

BACKGROUND

Australian healthcare relies on both private and public sectors to meet the demand for surgical care. Rapid growth of shoulder replacement surgery highlights a disparity in service provision, with two-thirds occurring privately. This study aimed to assess the influence of hospital setting on shoulder replacement revision rate at a national level.

METHODS

All primary shoulder replacements recorded by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry from April 2004 to December 2020 were included. Private and public settings were compared for stemmed total shoulder replacement (sTSR) for osteoarthritis (OA), reverse total shoulder replacement (rTSR) for OA/cuff arthropathy (CA), and rTSR for fracture. The primary outcome was cumulative percent revision (CPR), with Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship to determine differences between private and public hospitals, recorded as hazard ratios (HR). Secondary analyses investigated differences between hospital settings, targeting hospital outliers for revision and prosthesis selection.

RESULTS

Primary sTSR (OA) demonstrated a higher revision rate in private hospitals compared to public hospitals (HR = 1.27; P = 0.001), as did rTSR (OA/CA) after 3 months (HR = 1.33; P = 0.003). However, no significant difference was observed for primary rTSR (fracture) (HR = 1.10; P = 0.484). Restricting rTSR (OA/CA) to the best performing prosthesis combinations eliminated the difference between private and public outcomes (HR 1.10; P = 0.415). No other secondary analysis altered the primary result.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences exist between private and public hospitals for revision rate following primary shoulder replacement. Prosthesis selection accounts for some of the variation. Further analysis into patient specific characteristics is necessary to better understand these disparities.

Outpatient compared to inpatient thyroidectomy on 30-day postoperative outcomes: a national propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

To address the postoperative outcomes between outpatient and inpatient neck surgery involving thyroidectomy procedures.

METHODS

A cohort analysis of surgical patients undergoing primary, elective, total thyroidectomy from multiple United States medical institutions who were registered with the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2015 to 2018. The primary outcome was a composite score that included any 30-day postoperative adverse event.

RESULTS

A total of 55,381 patients who underwent a total thyroidectomy were identified comprising of 14,055 inpatient and 41,326 outpatient procedures. A cohort of 13,496 patients who underwent outpatient surgery were propensity matched for covariates with corresponding number of patients who underwent inpatient thyroidectomies. In the propensity matched cohort, the occurrence of any 30-day after surgery complications were greater in the inpatient group, 424 out of 13,496 (3.1%) compared to the outpatient group, 150 out of 13,496 (1.1%), P < 0.001. Moreover, death rates were greater in the inpatient group, 22 out 13,496 (0.16%) compared to the outpatient group, 2 out of 13,496 (0.01%), P < 0.001. Similarly, hospital readmissions occurred with greater frequency in the inpatient group, 438 out of 13,496 (3.2%) compared to the outpatient group, 310 out of 13,496 (2.3%), P < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

Thyroidectomy procedures performed in the outpatient setting had less rates of adverse events, including serious postoperative complications (e.g., surgical site infection, pneumonia, progressive renal insufficiency). In addition, patients who had thyroidectomy in the outpatient setting had less 30-day readmissions and mortality. Surgeons should recognize the benefits of outpatient thyroidectomy when selecting disposition of patients undergoing neck surgery.

The Impact of Frailty Is Age Dependent in Patients Undergoing Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: The Age-Adjusted Modified Frailty Index

BACKGROUND

Frailty is a well-established risk factor in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). How age modifies the impact of frailty on outcomes in these patients, however, remains unknown. In this study, we aimed to describe and evaluate the applicability of a novel risk stratification tool-the age-adjusted modified Frailty Index (aamFI)-in patients undergoing TKA.

METHODS

A national database was queried for all patients undergoing primary TKA from 2015 to 2019. There were 271,271 patients who met inclusion criteria for this study. First, outcomes were compared between chronologically young and old frail patients. In accordance with previous studies, the 75th percentile of age of all included patients (73 years) was used as a binary cutoff. Then, frailty was classified using the novel aamFI, which constitutes the 5-item mFI with the addition of 1 point for patients ≥73 years. Multivariable logistic regressions were then used to investigate the relationship between aamFI and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Frail patients ≥73 years had a higher incidence of complications compared to frail patients <73 years. There was a strong association between aamFI and complications. An aamFI of ≥3 (reference aamFI of 0) was associated with an increased odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 8.6, 95% CI 5.0-14.8), any complication (OR 3.1, 95% CI 2.9-3.3), deep vein thrombosis (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.8), and nonhome discharge (OR 6.1, 95% CI 5.8-6.4; all P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Although frailty negatively influences outcomes following TKA in patients of all ages, chronologically old, frail patients are particularly vulnerable. The aamFI accounts for this and represents a simple, but powerful tool for stratifying risk in patients undergoing primary TKA.

[Planning revision hip arthroplasty : What are the structural requirements?]

The results of many studies and register reports show that the frequency of primary hip arthroplasty per hospital, but also per surgeon, influence the outcome. In the large spectrum of revision hip arthroplasty volume-outcome effects have also partially been proven. It is obvious that with the increasing complexity of revision surgery and comorbidities, higher demands exist concerning collaborating disciplines as well as training and intervention frequency of the surgical team. Further aspects regarding organisation and structure such as the availability of specific revision implants and instruments must be ensured. In order to provide sustainable resources for revision surgery in an arthroplasty centre, organization of education and training for staff members in different disciplines and working levels must be ensured without quality impairment.

The Age-Adjusted Modified Frailty Index: An Improved Risk Stratification Tool for Patients Undergoing Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Frailty and increasing age are well-established risk factors in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, these variables have only been considered independently. This study assesses the interplay between age and frailty and introduces a novel age-adjusted modified frailty index (aamFI) for more refined risk stratification of THA patients.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried from 2015 to 2019 for patients undergoing primary THA. First, outcomes were compared between chronologically younger and older frail patients. Then, to establish the aamFI, one additional point was added to the previously described mFI-5 for patients aged ≥73 years (the 75th percentile for age in our study population). The association of aamFI with postoperative complications and resource utilization was then analyzed categorically.

RESULTS

A total of 165,957 THA patients were evaluated. Older frail patients had a higher incidence of complications than younger frail patients. Regression analysis demonstrated a strong association between aamFI and complications. For instance, an aamFI of ≥3 (compared to aamFI of 0) was associated with an increased odds of mortality (OR: 22.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11.62-41.68), any complication (OR: 3.50, 95% CI 3.23-3.80), deep vein thrombosis (OR: 2.85, 95% CI 2.03-4.01), and nonhome discharge (OR 9.61, 95% CI 9.04-10.21; all P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Chronologically, older patients are impacted more by frailty than younger patients. The aamFI accounts for this and outperforms the mFI-5 in prediction of postoperative complications and resource utilization in patients undergoing primary THA.

Has the time come for regional periprosthetic joint infection centers in the United States? A first-year experience

Several fields of orthopedics have concluded benefits from volume thresholds. We postulate that we could similarly optimize periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) treatment by creating a regional referral center, concentrating expertise and resources. Here, we review our reasoning and our first-year experience of a PJI referral center in the United States.

In-Hospital Mortality Is Associated With Low-Volume Hip Revision Centers After Septic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) after septic failure is associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared with aseptic revisions. The goals of this study were to characterize (1) the in-hospital mortality rate for patients with septic rTHA, (2) the effect of hospital hip revision surgery volume (HRV) on mortality after septic rTHA, and (3) the independent risk factors associated with in-hospital mortality rates after rTHA with 2-year follow-up. The authors analyzed the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases of New York and Florida to identify cases of septic rTHA from 2007 to 2012 with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes. The authors included patients with (1) no history of THA for 2 years before the index admission and (2) 2 years of follow-up. Groups with primary THA and aseptic rTHA were identified as control groups. Logistic regression was used to evaluate independent associations. Of 3057 patients with septic rTHA, 5.2% (n=160) had in-hospital mortality vs 2.9% of those with primary THA (n=3525, P=.0001) and 2.1% of those with aseptic rTHA (n=252, P=.0001). Octogenarian status, medium-risk Elixhauser comorbidity score, and high-risk Elixhauser comorbidity score were independent risk factors for mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.587, 95% CI=1.103-2.282, P=.0128; AOR=2.439, 95% CI=1.680-3.541, P<.0001; and AOR=6.367, 95% CI=4.134-9.804, P<.0001, respectively). Undergoing rTHA in a high-HRV hospital was associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR=0.539, 95% CI=0.332-0.877, P=.0127). Receiving care in a low-HRV hospital increased the risk of 2-year postoperative patient mortality. Similarly, older age and a higher comorbidity burden were independently associated with increased 2-year postoperative mortality. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(1):57-63.].

An epidemiological analysis of revision aetiologies in total hip arthroplasty at a single high-volume centre

Aims

Advances in surgical technique and implant design may influence the incidence and mechanism of failure resulting in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). The purpose of the current study was to characterize aetiologies requiring rTHA, and to determine whether temporal changes existed in these aetiologies over a ten-year period.

Methods

All rTHAs performed at a single institution from 2009 to 2019 were identified. Demographic information and mode of implant failure was obtained for all patients. Data for rTHA were stratified into two time periods to assess for temporal changes: 2009 to 2013, and 2014 to 2019. Operative reports, radiological imaging, and current procedural terminology (CPT) codes were cross-checked to ensure the accurate classification of revision aetiology for each patient.

Results

In all, 2,924 patients with a mean age of 64.6 years (17 to 96) were identified. There were 1,563 (53.5%) female patients, and the majority of patients were Caucasian (n = 2,362, 80.8%). The three most frequent rTHA aetiologies were infection (27.2%), aseptic loosening (25.2%), and wear (15.2%). The frequency of rTHA for adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) was significantly greater from 2014 to 2019 (4.7% vs 10.0%; p < 0.001), while the frequency of aseptic loosening was significantly greater from 2009 to 2013 (28.6% vs 21.9%; p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Periprosthetic joint infection was the most common cause for rTHA in the current cohort of patients. Complications associated with ALTR necessitating rTHA was more frequent between 2014 to 2019, while aseptic loosening necessitating rTHA was significantly more frequent between 2009 to 2013. Optimizing protocols for prevention and management of infection and ALTR after THA may help to avoid additional financial burden to institutions and healthcare systems.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;2(1):16-21.