Cost-benefit analysis of routine pathology examination in primary shoulder arthroplasty

Non-neoplastic bone, joint, and soft tissue pathology: What every pathologist should know

The diagnosis of bone and soft tissue tumors is a skill which requires experience across multiple disciplines while their incidence is small. By contrast, the numbers of patients with non-tumorous diseases of bones, soft tissues, and joints dwarfs primary tumors by several orders of magnitude. The ability to successfully diagnose non-neoplastic diseases requires a knowledge of bone development, structure, remodeling, imaging, and tissue processing. This review summarizes the alterations of bones, joints, and to a lesser extent soft tissues that are encountered in the practice of everyday surgical pathology.

Cost benefit analysis and pathology review of ileostomy and colostomy specimens processed over a 20-year period

Rising healthcare costs have been linked to overtreatment and overuse of available resources. Identifying and eliminating low-value services is vital for reducing such costs. At many institutions, including ours, all ileostomy and colostomy specimens are sent for pathological evaluation. It is estimated that approximately 120,000 ileostomy/colostomy procedures are done every year, and at least 1 million patients have stomas at any given time in North America. Hence, we decided to analyze the pathological findings and cost-benefit of undertaking the pathological evaluation of these colostomy and ileostomy specimens. The pathology database of our department was searched for all ileostomy and colostomy specimens received between 2000 and 2020, resulting in a total of 2762 cases (1944 ileostomy and 818 colostomy). We performed a cost-benefit analysis and pathologic review of these cases. The results of our study show that 99.38% of these specimens did not show any significant pathological abnormality, and non-neoplastic pathologic findings accounted for 99.63% of cases. Less than 1% of our cases showed any clinically significant pathological findings. All 10 cases that showed a neoplastic or malignant diagnosis showed some abnormal finding that was appreciated at the time of gross examination. We conclude that microscopic evaluation of ileostomy and colostomy specimens incurs significant costs and provides no clear value or relevant information for patient care. The results of our study provide support for ileostomy and colostomy specimens to be triaged by gross-only pathological examination in the first instance for the vast majority of cases.

Routine Histopathologic Analysis of Hip and Knee Bone Specimens After Total Joint Arthroplasty

Total hip and total knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA) are some of the most common elective surgeries done in the United States. Routine histopathologic analysis of hip and knee bone specimens after total joint arthroplasty commonly occurs to identify unexpected pathologic findings and serves as a quality assurance measure. As the most common indication for THA and TKA is osteoarthritis, the practice of routine histopathologic analysis may not be routinely warranted. There is no clear consensus on the cost-effectiveness of this practice, and the literature has questioned both the clinical relevance of discrepancies between surgeon diagnosis and histopathological diagnosis and raised concerns about variance in the histological evaluation of resected specimens by pathologists. Femoral head analysis in the setting of femoral neck fractures has been previously reported, yet there is no clear overview for this topic in the setting of elective THA. The histopathologic features of bone specimens during routine total joint arthroplasty, the cost-effectiveness, and current recommendations will be reviewed.

Developing an Institute for Health Care Delivery Science: successes, challenges, and solutions in the first five years

Medical knowledge is increasing at an exponential rate. At the same time, unexplained variations in practice and patient outcomes and unacceptable rates of medical errors and inefficiencies in health care delivery have emerged. Our Institute for Health Care Delivery Science (I-HDS) began in 2014 as a novel platform to conduct multidisciplinary healthcare delivery research. We followed ten strategies to develop a successful institute with excellence in methodology and strong understanding of the value of team science. Our work was organized around five hubs: 1) Quality/Process Improvement and Systematic Review, 2) Comparative Effectiveness Research, Pragmatic Clinical Trials, and Predictive Analytics, 3) Health Economics and Decision Modeling, 4) Qualitative, Survey, and Mixed Methods, and 5) Training and Mentoring. In the first 5 years of the I-HDS, we have identified opportunities for change in clinical practice through research using our health system's electronic health record (EHR) data, and designed programs to educate clinicians in the value of research to improve patient care and recognize efficiencies in processes. Testing the value of several model interventions has guided prioritization of evidence-based quality improvements. Some of the changes in practice have already been embedded in the EHR workflow successfully. Development and sustainability of the I-HDS has been fostered by a mix of internal and external funding, including philanthropic foundations. Challenges remain due to the highly competitive funding environment and changes needed to adapt the EHR to healthcare delivery research. Further stakeholder engagement and culture change working with hospital leadership and I-HDS core and affiliate members continues.

Novel in vivo mouse model of shoulder implant infection

BACKGROUND

Animal models are used to guide management of periprosthetic implant infections. No adequate model exists for periprosthetic shoulder infections, and clinicians thus have no preclinical tools to assess potential therapeutics. We hypothesize that it is possible to establish a mouse model of shoulder implant infection (SII) that allows noninvasive, longitudinal tracking of biofilm and host response through in vivo optical imaging. The model may then be employed to validate a targeting probe (1D9-680) with clinical translation potential for diagnosing infection and image-guided débridement.

METHODS

A surgical implant was press-fit into the proximal humerus of c57BL/6J mice and inoculated with 2 μL of 1 × 103 (e3), or 1 × 104 (e4), colony-forming units (CFUs) of bioluminescent Staphylococcus aureus Xen-36. The control group received 2 μL sterile saline. Bacterial activity was monitored in vivo over 42 days, directly (bioluminescence) and indirectly (targeting probe). Weekly radiographs assessed implant loosening. CFU harvests, confocal microscopy, and histology were performed.

RESULTS

Both inoculated groups established chronic infections. CFUs on postoperative day (POD) 42 were increased in the infected groups compared with the sterile group (P < .001). By POD 14, osteolysis was visualized in both infected groups. The e4 group developed catastrophic bone destruction by POD 42. The e3 group maintained a congruent shoulder joint. Targeting probes helped to visualize low-grade infections via fluorescence.

DISCUSSION

Given bone destruction in the e4 group, a longitudinal, noninvasive mouse model of SII and chronic osteolysis was produced using e3 of S aureus Xen-36, mimicking clinical presentations of chronic SII.

CONCLUSION

The development of this model provides a foundation to study new therapeutics, interventions, and host modifications.

A Cost Analysis of Pathology Evaluation of Carotid Plaque after Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Overtreatment and overuse of resources are leading causes of rising health care costs. Identification and elimination process of low value services is important in reducing such costs. At many institutions it is routine to send excised plaque after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for pathology evaluation. With more than 140,000 CEAs performed annually in the United States, this represents an opportunity for potential cost savings. We set out to examine the cost and clinical use of pathology evaluation of plaque after CEA.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing CEA at a single institution from 2016 to 2019. Patients were excluded if they had a prolonged postoperative length of stay or if they had a preoperative stroke. Demographics, perioperative outcomes, and billing costs were recorded.

RESULTS

We identified 82 total CEAs, of which 42 were excluded according to the aforementioned exclusion criteria. We reviewed 40 CEAs. Mean age of this cohort was 67.2 (±8.3) years. Most (72.5%) were asymptomatic at the time of admission, whereas 27.5% presented with a transient ischemic attack. Mean postoperative length of stay was 1.8 days. The primary insurers were 39.5% private, 39.5% Medicare, and 21.1% Medicaid. Mean total charges for the hospitalization were $83,367 (±$42,874). Of this total, professional fees were $3,512 (±$980) and facility fees were $80,395 (±$42,886). Mean pathology charges were $285 (±$88). The pathology professional fee was $61 (±$27), which represented 1.82% (±0.88) of the professional costs. Reimbursement for the facility pathology charge was $229 (±$57) and for the professional pathology charge was $25 (±$14). All plaque samples were submitted for gross examination and hematoxylin and eosin staining. The correlation rate for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis was 100%. The pathology reports simply read "atherosclerotic plaque" and "calcific plaque" in 32.5% and 45% of samples. For the remaining plaques, 12.5% and 10% of reports also noted fibrosis and degenerative changes, respectively. There were no clinical implications or decisions made based on the pathology reports. Cost of pathology evaluation was on average $285, with an average reimbursement of $235. With 140,000 CEAs done annually, this represents a potential $32.9-$39.9 million saved to the health care system.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathology evaluation of carotid plaque incurs significant costs to the health care system with no clear value for the postoperative care of the patient. Hospital policy regarding mandatory pathologic examination and surgeon preferences regarding plaque analysis should be more closely examined.

Cost Analysis of Routine Examination of Pathology Specimens Following Ankle Arthroscopy

Background:

Routine submission of pathologic specimens for histologic analysis following orthopedic surgery is a common and often required practice in the United States. Prior orthopedic studies have determined that these histologic examinations are of limited cost effectiveness and low clinical value because rarely do the pathology findings alter patient management. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness and clinical significance of routine histologic examination of tissue specimens removed during ankle arthroscopy.

Methods:

Between 2014 and 2018, 408 patients underwent ankle arthroscopy at a multi-center hospital system by 16 different orthopedic surgeons. The available pathology reports from these cases were retrospectively reviewed to determine if the routine histologic examination altered patient care. We compared the preoperative diagnosis to both the postoperative and histologic diagnoses. The total cost for these histologic examinations was estimated using 2017 Medicare physician fees released by the College of American Pathologists. Cost-effectiveness was estimated in 2017 US dollars by cost per discrepant and discordant diagnosis.

Results:

Of the 408 patients who underwent ankle arthroscopy, 361 pathology reports were available for review. The prevalence of concordant diagnosis was 98.9% (357/361); the prevalence of discrepant diagnoses was 1.0% (4/361). There were no cases identified with a discordant diagnosis. Total estimated cost for all pathology specimens was $46 381 in 2017 US dollars. Cost per discrepant diagnosis was $11 595.

Conclusion:

In our study, histologic examination of surgical specimens following ankle arthroscopy had no effect on patient management, yet it increased costs. Routine examination of these pathologic specimens had a low rate of discrepant and/or discordant diagnoses. Based on our results, routine pathologic examination of ankle arthroscopy tissue specimens should be sent solely at the discretion of the orthopedic surgeon as opposed to being a mandated policy.

Level of Evidence:

Level IV, case series.

Are Histological Examinations of Arthroplasty Specimens Performed Consistently Across the Country? A Large Database Study

BACKGROUND

It is currently unknown to what extent routine histological examination of joint arthroplasty specimens occurs across hospitals nationwide. Although this practice is neither supported nor refuted by the available evidence, given the increasing demand for joint arthroplasties, it is crucial to study overall utilization as well as its main drivers.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using national data on joint replacements, we aimed to evaluate: (1) What is the current use of routine histological examination of joint arthroplasty specimens? (2) Does the use vary by geographic location and hospital characteristics? (3) Has use changed over time?

METHODS

From the Premier Healthcare database (2006-2016) we included claims data from 87,667 shoulder (595 hospitals, median age 70 years, 16% nonwhite), 564,577 hip (629 hospitals, median age 65 years, 21% nonwhite), and 1,131,323 (630 hospitals, median age 66 years, 24% nonwhite) knee arthroplasties (all elective). Our study group has extensive experience with this data set, which contains information on 20% to 25% of all US hospitalizations. Included hospitals are mainly concentrated in the South (approximately 40%) with equal distributions among the Northeast, West, and Midwest (approximately 20% each). Moreover, the Premier data set has detailed billing information, which allows for evaluations of real-world clinical practice. There was no missing information on the main variables of interest for this specific study. We assessed frequency of histology examination (defined by Current Procedural Terminology codes) overall as well as by hospital characteristics (urban/rural, bed size, teaching status, arthroplasty volume), geographic region (Northeast, South, Midwest, West), and year. Given the large sample size, instead of p values, standardized differences were applied in assessing group differences where a standardized difference of > 0.1 (or 10%) was assumed to represent a meaningful difference between groups. For significance of trends, p values were applied. Percentages provided represent proportions of individual procedures.

RESULTS

In most hospitals, histology testing was either rare (1%-10%, used in 187 of 595, 189 of 629, and 254 of 630 hospitals) or ubiquitous (91%-100%, used in 121 of 595, 220 of 629, and 195 of 630 hospitals) for shoulder, hip, and knee arthroplasties, respectively. Overall, histology testing occurred more often in smaller hospitals (37%-53% compared with 26%-45% in larger hospitals) and those located in the Northeast (59%-68% compared with 22%-44% in other regions) and urban areas (32%-49% compared with 20%-31% in rural areas), all with standardized differences > 10%. Histologic examination is slowly decreasing over time: from 2006 to 2016, it decreased from 34% to 30% for shoulder arthroplasty, from 50% to 45% for THAs, and from 43% to 38% for TKAs (all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although overall use is decreasing, a substantial number of hospitals still routinely perform histology testing of arthroplasty specimens. Moreover, variation between regions and hospital types suggests that this practice is driven by a variety of factors. This is the first study addressing national utilization, which will be helpful for individual hospitals to assess how they compare with national utilization patterns. Moreover, the findings have clear implications for followup studies, which may be necessary given the exponentially growing demand for arthroplasties.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.