Colleen A Weeks1, Jacquelyn D Marsh1, Steven J MacDonald1, Stephen Graves2, Edward M Vasarhelyi1. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. 2. Australian Orthopaedic Association, National Joint Replacement Registry, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study estimates the cost-effectiveness of patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision analytic model representing a hypothetical TKA cohort, with or without patellar resurfacing, using data from the 2014 Australian Registry. The model represents 3 possible postoperative health states: (1) well, (2) patellofemoral pain, or (3) serious adverse event (any event resulting in a revision). Our effectiveness outcome was the quality-adjusted life year, from published utility scores. We estimated cost-effectiveness from a Canadian public healthcare payer perspective. Costs and quality of life were valued in 2015 United States dollars and discounted annually at 5%. RESULTS: Our results suggest that TKA with resurfacing is cost-effective compared to nonresurfacing. Unresurfacing the patellae resulted in higher costs ($13,296.63 vs $12,917.01) and lower quality-adjusted life year (5.37 vs 6.01) at 14 years. Sensitivity analysis suggests that if rates of secondary resurfacing are <0.5%, there was no cost difference. CONCLUSION: Over 14 years postoperative, patellar resurfacing appears to be cost-effective, due to higher revision rates for unresurfaced TKA. Although our results suggest resurfacing improves quality of life, our model is limited by the availability and validity of long-term utility outcomes reported for TKA. Our cost-effectiveness analysis showed superiority of the resurfacing compared to retention of the patella.
BACKGROUND: This study estimates the cost-effectiveness of patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision analytic model representing a hypothetical TKA cohort, with or without patellar resurfacing, using data from the 2014 Australian Registry. The model represents 3 possible postoperative health states: (1) well, (2) patellofemoral pain, or (3) serious adverse event (any event resulting in a revision). Our effectiveness outcome was the quality-adjusted life year, from published utility scores. We estimated cost-effectiveness from a Canadian public healthcare payer perspective. Costs and quality of life were valued in 2015 United States dollars and discounted annually at 5%. RESULTS: Our results suggest that TKA with resurfacing is cost-effective compared to nonresurfacing. Unresurfacing the patellae resulted in higher costs ($13,296.63 vs $12,917.01) and lower quality-adjusted life year (5.37 vs 6.01) at 14 years. Sensitivity analysis suggests that if rates of secondary resurfacing are <0.5%, there was no cost difference. CONCLUSION: Over 14 years postoperative, patellar resurfacing appears to be cost-effective, due to higher revision rates for unresurfaced TKA. Although our results suggest resurfacing improves quality of life, our model is limited by the availability and validity of long-term utility outcomes reported for TKA. Our cost-effectiveness analysis showed superiority of the resurfacing compared to retention of the patella.
Authors: Elsa M R Marques; Jane Dennis; Andrew D Beswick; Julian Higgins; Howard Thom; Nicky Welton; Amanda Burston; Linda Hunt; Michael R Whitehouse; Ashley W Blom Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-01-06 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Thomas Parsons; Talal Al-Jabri; Nick D Clement; Nicola Maffulli; Deiary F Kader Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2021-03-11 Impact factor: 2.359
Authors: Bart J Robben; Astrid J De Vries; Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren; Rob G H H Nelissen; Reinoud W Brouwer Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2022-02-14 Impact factor: 3.717