Excess Cost and Healthcare Resources Associated With Delayed Diagnosis of Charcot Foot

The Differentiation Between Infection and Acute Charcot

The differentiation between acute Charcot neuroarthropathy and infection in the foot and ankle should be supported by multiple criteria. A detailed history and physical examination should always be completed. Plain radiographs should be performed, though advanced imaging, currently MRI, is more helpful in diagnosis. Scintigraphy and PET may become the standard imaging modalities once they are more clinically available due to their reported increased accuracy. Laboratory analysis can also act as a helpful diagnostic tool. Histopathology with culturing should be performed if osteomyelitis is suspected. The prompt diagnosis and initiation of treatment is vital to reducing patient morbidity and mortality.

A Pilot Survey: Knowledge of Charcot Neuroarthropathy Among Family and Internal Medicine Practitioners

Charcot neuroarthropathy secondary to diabetes mellitus is a serious complication, requiring specialist management. As a relatively rare pathology bearing similarity to other, more common diseases, it may be misdiagnosed at initial presentation, potentially leading to delays in appropriate management. We conducted a 2-part online survey of primary care physicians within an academic medical institution to assess knowledge of presentation, complications, diagnosis, and treatment of Charcot neuropathy. The first section was designed to assess physician knowledge of Charcot foot, while the second section was completed only by physicians who were familiar with the condition and was designed to gauge their level of knowledge. Most clinicians were familiar with Charcot, encountering it at least annually. They identified common signs of Charcot (eg, swelling, pain) and complications due to its mismanagement (eg, ulcer, amputation). However, there was some disagreement on how to diagnose the pathology, with some relying on film, others referring to specialists, and some saying they were unsure. There was uncertainty on when to choose surgical options; fewer than half referred to specialists for help with this decision, and a quarter were unsure how to make the decision. While, in general, clinicians were aware of Charcot and its characteristics, there was confusion regarding how to diagnose or appropriate nonsurgical treatment.

Differences in Patient and Physician Perceptions of Urgency for Musculoskeletal Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic

In 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic limited musculoskeletal care to urgent or "nonelective" office visits and procedures. No guidelines exist to inform patients or physicians what meets these criteria. The purpose of this multi-institutional study was to describe the differences in perceptions of urgency for musculoskeletal complaints between patients and providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. An anonymous survey was distributed to patients who visited the authors' orthopedic clinics in January and February 2020 and practicing orthopedic surgeons. The surveys were administered in May 2020 after COVID-19 was officially labeled a pandemic and included questions regarding demographic information and perceptions of orthopedic urgency. A total of 1491 patients and 128 physicians completed the surveys. A significantly higher percentage of physicians considered the following diagnoses an appropriate indication for an urgent visit compared with patients: fracture (P<.001), acute dislocation (P<.001), infection (P<.001), neurologic compromise (P<.001), tumor (P<.001), acute tendon injury (P<.001), weakness (P<.001), inability to bear weight (P<.001), post-surgical problem (P<.001), and painful joint effusion (P<.001). There were no significant differences in the perception of urgency for the following conditions: bursitis/tendonitis (P=1.00), joint/extremity deformity without pain (P=.113), and loss of range of motion of a joint (P=.467). Younger patients and those with higher levels of education were significantly more likely to consider their conditions urgent. Patients may require additional education to prevent delay in treatment of urgent conditions-especially time-sensitive conditions such as neurologic compromise, tumors, and infections-when access to physicians is limited. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(4):e534-e538.].

Effect of Recombinant Human Parathyroid Hormone (1-84) on Resolution of Active Charcot Neuro-osteoarthropathy in Diabetes: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

Fractures in Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy (CN) often fail to heal despite prolonged immobilization with below-knee casting. The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of recombinant human parathyroid hormone (PTH) in reducing time to resolution of CN and healing of fractures.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

People with diabetes and acute (active) Charcot foot were randomized (double-blind) to either full-length PTH (1-84) or placebo therapy, both in addition to below-knee casting and calcium and vitamin D3 supplementation. The primary outcome was resolution of CN, defined as a skin foot temperature difference >2°C at two consecutive monthly visits.

RESULTS

Median time to resolution was 5 months (95% CI 4, 12) in intervention and 6 months (95% CI 2, 9) in control. On univariate mixed Cox and logistic regression, there was no significant difference in time to resolution between the groups (P = 0.64) or in the likelihood of resolution (P = 0.66). The hazard ratio of resolution was 0.84 (95% CI 0.41, 1.74; P = 0.64), and the odds ratio of resolution by 12 months was 0.80 (95% CI 0.3, 2.13; P = 0.66) (intervention vs. control). On linear regression analysis, there were no significant differences in the effect of treatment on fracture scores quantitated on MRI scans (coefficient 0.13 [95% CI -0.62, 0.88]; P = 0.73) and on foot and ankle X-rays (coefficient 0.30 [95% CI -0.03, 0.63]; P = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

This double-blind placebo-controlled trial did not reduce time to resolution or enhance fracture healing of CN. There was no added benefit of daily intervention with PTH (1-84) to below-knee casting in achieving earlier resolution of CN.

Is Reconstruction of Unstable Midfoot Charcot Neuroarthropathy Cost Effective from a US Payer's Perspective?

BACKGROUND

Charcot neuroarthropathy is a morbid and expensive complication of diabetes that can lead to lower extremity amputation. Current treatment of unstable midfoot deformity includes lifetime limb bracing, primary transtibial amputation, or surgical reconstruction of the deformity. In the absence of a widely adopted treatment algorithm, the decision to pursue more costly attempts at reconstruction in the United States continues to be driven by surgeon preference.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

To examine the cost effectiveness (defined by lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]) of surgical reconstruction and its alternatives (primary transtibial amputation and lifetime bracing) for adults with diabetes and unstable midfoot Charcot neuroarthropathy using previously published cost data.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to compare Charcot reconstruction and its alternatives in three progressively worsening clinical scenarios: no foot ulcer, uncomplicated (or uninfected) ulcer, and infected ulcer. Our base case scenario was a 50-year-old adult with diabetes and unstable midfoot deformity. Patients were placed into health states based on their disease stage. Transitions between health states occurred annually using probabilities estimated from the evidence obtained after systematic review. The time horizon was 50 cycles. Data regarding costs were obtained from a systematic review. Costs were converted to 2019 USD using the Consumer Price Index. The primary outcomes included the long-term costs and QALYs, which were combined to form ICERs. Willingness-to-pay was set at USD 100,000/QALY. Multiple sensitivity analyses and probabilistic analyses were performed to measure model uncertainty.

RESULTS

The most effective strategy for patients without foot ulcers was Charcot reconstruction, which resulted in an additional 1.63 QALYs gained and an ICER of USD 14,340 per QALY gained compared with lifetime bracing. Reconstruction was also the most effective strategy for patients with uninfected foot ulcers, resulting in an additional 1.04 QALYs gained, and an ICER of USD 26,220 per QALY gained compared with bracing. On the other hand, bracing was cost effective in all scenarios and was the only cost-effective strategy for patents with infected foot ulcers; it resulted in 6.32 QALYs gained and an ICER of USD 15,010 per QALY gained compared with transtibial amputation. As unstable midfoot Charcot neuroarthropathy progressed to deep infection, reconstruction lost its value (ICER USD 193,240 per QALY gained) compared with bracing. This was driven by the increasing costs associated with staged surgeries, combined with a higher frequency of complications and shorter patient life expectancies in the infected ulcer cohort. The findings in the no ulcer and uncomplicated ulcer cohorts were both unchanged after multiple sensitivity analyses; however, threshold effects were identified in the infected ulcer cohort during the sensitivity analysis. When the cost of surgery dropped below USD 40,000 or the frequency of postoperative complications dropped below 50%, surgical reconstruction became cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons aiming to offer both clinically effective and cost-effective care would do well to discuss surgical reconstruction early with patients who have unstable midfoot Charcot neuroarthropathy, and they should favor lifetime bracing only after deep infection develops. Future clinical studies should focus on methods of minimizing surgical complications and/or reducing operative costs in patients with infected foot ulcers.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, economic and decision analysis.

Charcot Reconstruction: Understanding and Treating the Deformed Charcot Neuropathic Arthropathic Foot

With worsening diet and increasing prevalence of diabetes, patient encounters with Charcot neuropathic arthropathy (CNA) are expected to increase. Without intervention, the pathology progresses with further subluxation/dislocation and fracture, placing soft tissues at risk of preulceration or formal ulceration, infection, and potentially major amputation. The need to avoid amputation is of paramount importance. Although a formal single eradicating tool for CNA is lacking, there is capacity to intervene in ways that may curtail the pace of destruction. This article reviews understanding of the disease process and provides guidance to surgical reconstruction of the deformity.

Updates on Diabetic Foot and Charcot Osteopathic Arthropathy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes mellitus affects approximately 30.8 million people currently living in the USA. Chronic diabetes complications, including diabetic foot complications, remain prevalent and challenging to treat. We review clinical diagnosis and challenges providers may encounter when managing diabetic foot ulcers and Charcot neuroarthropathy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mechanisms controlling these diseases are being elucidated and not fully understood. Offloading is paramount to heal and manage diabetic foot ulcers and Charcot neuroarthropathy. Diabetic foot ulcers recur and the importance of routine surveillance and multidisciplinary approach is essential. Several predictors of failure in Charcot foot include a related diabetic foot ulcer, midfoot or rearfoot location of the Charcot event, and progressive bony changes on interval radiographs. Patients with diabetic foot ulcer and/or Charcot neuroarthropathy are in need of consistent and regular special multidisciplinary care. If not diagnosed early and managed effectively, morbidity and mortality significantly increase.