Is 2-Stage Septic Revision Worth the Money? A Cost-Utility Analysis of a 1-Stage Versus 2-Stage Septic Revision of Total Knee Arthroplasty

被引:10
作者
Okafor, Charles E. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Nghiem, Son [3 ]
Byrnes, Joshua [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Griffith Univ, Ctr Appl Hlth Econ, Sch Med & Dent, Nathan, Qld, Australia
[2] Griffith Univ, Menzies Hlth Inst, Nathan, Qld, Australia
[3] Australian Natl Univ, Dept Hlth Serv Res & Policy, Canberra, Australia
[4] Griffith Univ, Ctr Appl Hlth Econ, Sch Med & Dent, 170 Kessels Rd, Nathan, Qld 4111, Australia
关键词
revision; knee; cost-utility; Australia; willingness-to-pay; prosthetic joint infection; PREFERENCE-BASED MEASURE; INFECTION-CONTROL; EXCHANGE; STAGE; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1016/j.arth.2022.09.003
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Two-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the gold standard for the management of pros-thetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee, but several studies have demonstrated that 1-stage exchange is as effective as 2-stage exchange. This study aimed to support decision-making via an economic evaluation of 1-stage compared to 2-stage exchange for total knee arthroplasty septic revision in patients who did not have compelling indication PJI (ie, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, multiorganism, sys-temic sepsis, comorbidities, culture negative, resistant organism, and immunocompromised) to undergo a 2-stage exchange. Methods: A cost-utility analysis was performed using a Markov cohort model from the health care provider perspective using Australia data. One-stage septic knee revisions were compared with 2-stage exchange procedures for chronic PJI using a patient-lifetime horizon. Health outcomes were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), whereas costs were presented in 2020 Australian dollars. Sensitivity analyses, population expected values of perfect information, and the perfect information for parameters (EVPPI) were assessed to estimate the opportunity costs surrounding the decision made at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2-stage exchange compared with 1-stage exchange was $231,000 per QALY, with 98.5% of the probabilistic sensitivity simulations above the willingness-to-pay threshold. The population expected value of perfect information was $882,000, whereas the ex-pected value of perfect information for parameters for the "cost parameters" was $207,000. Conclusion: The adoption of 1-stage septic knee revision is the optimal choice for patients who have a PJI and who do not have a compelling need for a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty. One-stage exchange for PJI should be advocated in patients who meet the eligibility criteria. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:347 / 354
页数:8
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [21] Results of direct exchange or debridement of the infected total knee arthroplasty
    Silva, M
    Tharani, R
    Schmalzried, TP
    [J]. CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2002, (404) : 125 - 131
  • [22] High Rate of Infection Control with One-stage Revision of Septic Knee Prostheses Excluding MRSA and MRSE
    Singer, Joachim
    Merz, Andreas
    Frommelt, Lars
    Fink, Bernd
    [J]. CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2012, 470 (05) : 1461 - 1471
  • [23] Taylor C, 2017, AUST PRESCR, V40, P76, DOI 10.18773/austprescr.2017.014
  • [24] The Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey, WHAT IT IS IT IS US
  • [25] Vaishya R, 2017, CUREUS J MED SCIENCE, V9, DOI 10.7759/cureus.1629