Advertisement

Impact of Indication for Revision THA on Resource Utilization

      Abstract

      Background

      Demographic variables play an important role in outcomes following revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Surgical and in-patient variables as well as outcomes vary between indications for rTHA. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the indication for the rTHA on costs and postoperative outcomes.

      Methods

      This retrospective cohort analysis investigated all patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTHA at an academic orthopaedic specialty hospital who had at least 1-year postoperative follow-up. In total, 654 patients were evaluated and categorized based on their indication for aseptic rTHA. Demographics, direct and total procedure costs, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were collected and compared between indications.

      Results

      Younger patients had the greatest leg length discrepancy (LLD) and older patients had the highest incidence of periprosthetic fracture (PPF) (P = .001). The greatest proportion of full revisions were found for LLD (16.7%) and head/polyethylene liner-only revisions for metallosis/adverse tissue reaction (100%). Operative time was significantly longest for LLD revisions and shortest for metallosis/adverse tissue reaction revisions (P < .001). Length of stay was longest for periprosthetic fracture and shortest for LLD and stiffness/heterotopic ossification (P < .001). Re-revision rate was greatest for implant failure and lowest for LLD. Total cost was highest for PPF (148.9%) and lowest for polyethylene liner wear (87.7%).

      Conclusions

      Patients undergoing rTHA for indications such as PPF and aseptic loosening were associated with longer operative times, length of stay and higher total and direct costs. Therefore, they may need increased perioperative attention with respect to resource utilization, risk stratification, surgical planning, and cost-reducing measures.

      Level III Evidence

      Retrospective Cohort Study.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The Journal of Arthroplasty
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Berger R.A.
        • Kull L.R.
        • Rosenberg A.G.
        • Galante J.O.
        Hybrid total hip arthroplasty: 7- to 10-year results.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; 333: 134-146https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199612000-00013
        • Schmitz P.P.
        • van Susante J.L.C.
        • Hol A.
        • Brokelman R.
        • van Loon C.J.M.
        No decline in high patient satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty at long-term follow-up.
        Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2019; 29: 91-95https://doi.org/10.1007/S00590-018-2243-6/TABLES/2
        • Bozic K.J.
        • Kurtz S.M.
        • Lau E.
        • Ong K.
        • Vail D.T.P.
        • Berry D.J.
        The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91: 128-133https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.00155
        • Kurtz S.
        • Ong K.
        • Lau E.
        • Mowat F.
        • Halpern M.
        Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 780-785https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00222
        • Schwartz A.M.
        • Farley K.X.
        • Guild G.N.
        • Jr T.L.B.
        Projections and epidemiology of revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States to 2030.
        J Arthroplasty. 2020; 35: S79-S85https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.030
        • Patil S.
        • Garbuz D.S.
        • Greidanus N.V.
        • Masri B.A.
        • Duncan C.P.
        Quality of life outcomes in revision vs primary total hip arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study.
        J Arthroplasty. 2008; 23: 550-553https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2007.04.035
        • Rajaee S.S.
        • Campbell J.C.
        • Mirocha J.
        • Paiement G.D.
        Increasing burden of total hip arthroplasty revisions in patients between 45 and 64 years of age.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018; 100: 449-458https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.17.00470
        • Lachiewicz P.F.
        • Soileau E.S.
        Changing indications for revision total hip arthroplasty.
        J Surg Orthop Adv. 2005; 14: 82-84
        • Saleh K.J.
        • Celebrezze M.
        • Kassim R.
        • Dykes D.C.
        • Gioe T.J.
        • Callaghan J.J.
        • et al.
        Functional outcome after revision hip arthroplasty: a metaanalysis.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; 416: 254-264https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BLO.0000093006.90435.43
        • Jafari S.M.
        • Coyle C.
        • Mortazavi S.M.J.
        • Sharkey P.F.
        • Parvizi J.
        Revision hip arthroplasty: infection is the most common cause of failure.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468: 2046-2051https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-010-1251-6/FIGURES/6
        • Wetters N.G.
        • Murray T.G.
        • Moric M.
        • Sporer S.M.
        • Paprosky W.G.
        • Della Valle C.J.
        Risk factors for dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471: 410-416https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-012-2561-7/TABLES/5
        • Herman A.
        • Masri B.A.
        • Duncan C.P.
        • Greidanus N.V.
        • Garbuz D.S.
        Multivariate analysis of risk factors for re-dislocation after revision for dislocation after total hip arthroplasty.
        Hip Int. 2020; 30: 93-100https://doi.org/10.1177/1120700019831628
        • Traven S.A.
        • Reeves R.A.
        • Slone H.S.
        • Walton Z.J.
        Frailty predicts medical complications, length of stay, readmission, and mortality in revision hip and knee arthroplasty.
        J Arthroplasty. 2019; 34: 1412-1416https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2019.02.060
        • Wilson J.M.
        • Farley K.X.
        • Erens G.A.
        • Bradbury T.L.
        • Guild G.N.
        Preoperative depression is associated with increased risk following revision total joint arthroplasty.
        J Arthroplasty. 2020; 35: 1048-1053https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2019.11.025
        • Traven S.A.
        • Chiaramonti A.M.
        • Barfield W.R.
        • Kirkland P.A.
        • Demos H.A.
        • Schutte H.D.
        • et al.
        Fewer complications following revision hip and knee arthroplasty in patients with normal Vitamin D levels.
        J Arthroplasty. 2017; 32: S193-S196https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2017.02.038
        • Davis A.M.
        • Agnidis Z.
        • Badley E.
        • Kiss A.
        • Waddell J.P.
        • Gross A.E.
        Predictors of functional outcome two years following revision hip arthroplasty.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88: 685-691https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.00150
        • Young S.W.
        • Walker C.
        • Pitto R.
        Revision arthroplasty for periprosthetic fracture.
        Orthop Proc. 2018; 91: 172-173
        • Khatod M.
        • Cafri G.
        • Namba R.S.
        • Inacio M.C.S.
        • Paxton E.W.
        Risk factors for total hip arthroplasty aseptic revision.
        J Arthroplasty. 2014; 29: 1412-1417https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2014.01.023
        • Bozic K.J.
        • Katz P.
        • Cisternas M.
        • Ono L.
        • Ries M.D.
        • Showstack J.
        Hospital resource utilization for primary and revision total hip arthroplasty.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87: 570-576https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02121
        • Laffosse J.-M.
        Removal of well-fixed fixed femoral stems.
        Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016; 102: S177-S187https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2015.06.029
        • Wronka K.S.
        • Gerard-Wilson M.
        • Peel E.
        • Rolfson O.
        • Cnudde P.H.J.
        Extended trochanteric osteotomy: improving the access and reducing the risk in revision THA.
        EFORT Open Rev. 2020; 5: 104-112https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.5.190005
        • Lyons R.F.
        • Piggott R.P.
        • Curtin W.
        • Murphy C.G.
        Periprosthetic hip fractures: a review of the economic burden based on length of stay.
        J Orthop. 2018; 15: 118-121https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOR.2018.01.006
        • Phillips J.R.A.
        • Boulton C.
        • Moran C.G.
        • Manktelow A.R.J.
        What is the financial cost of treating periprosthetic hip fractures?.
        Injury. 2011; 42: 146-149https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INJURY.2010.06.003
        • Ehlinger M.
        • Delaunay C.
        • Karoubi M.
        • Bonnomet F.
        • Ramdane N.
        • Hamadouche M.
        Revision of primary total hip arthroplasty for peri-prosthetic fracture: a prospective epidemiological study of 249 consecutive cases in France.
        Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014; 100: 657-662https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OTSR.2014.03.030
        • Bozic K.J.
        • Kamath A.F.
        • Ong K.
        • Lau E.
        • Kurtz S.
        • Chan V.
        • et al.
        Comparative epidemiology of revision arthroplasty: failed THA poses greater clinical and economic burdens than failed TKA.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473: 2131-2138https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4078-8
        • Cherian J.J.
        • Jauregui J.J.
        • Banerjee S.
        • Pierce T.
        • Mont M.A.
        What host factors affect aseptic loosening after THA and TKA?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473: 2700-2709https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-015-4220-2/FIGURES/6
        • Friedman R.J.
        • Hirst P.
        • Poss R.
        • Kelley K.
        • Sledge C.B.
        Results of revision total knee arthroplasty performed for aseptic loosening.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990; 255: 235-241https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199006000-00031
        • Yu S.
        • Saleh H.
        • Bolz N.
        • Buza J.
        • Iorio R.
        • Rathod P.A.
        • et al.
        Re-revision total hip arthroplasty: epidemiology and factors associated with outcomes.
        J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020; 11: 43-46https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2018.08.021
        • Teng S.
        • Yi C.
        • Krettek C.
        • Jagodzinski M.
        Smoking and risk of prosthesis-related complications after total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.
        PLoS One. 2015; 10: e0125294https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0125294
        • Debbi E.M.
        • Rajaee S.S.
        • Spitzer A.I.
        • Paiement G.D.
        Smoking and total hip arthroplasty: increased inpatient complications, costs, and length of stay.
        J Arthroplasty. 2019; 34: 1736-1739https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2019.03.059
        • Bozic K.J.
        • Ward L.
        • Vail T.P.
        • Maze M.
        Bundled payments in total joint arthroplasty: targeting opportunities for quality improvement and cost reduction.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 472: 188-193https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-013-3034-3
        • Slover J.D.
        • Mullaly K.A.
        • Payne A.
        • Iorio R.
        • Bosco J.
        What is the best strategy to minimize after-care costs for total joint arthroplasty in a bundled payment environment?.
        J Arthroplasty. 2016; 31: 2710-2713https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2016.05.024