Abstract

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a common cause of revision total knee surgery. Although debridement and implant retention (DAIR) has lower success rates in the chronic setting, it is an accepted treatment of acute PJI, whether postoperatively or with late hematogenous seeding. There are two broad DAIR strategies: single debridement and planned double debridement. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of single vs double DAIR for acute PJI in total knee arthroplasty.MethodsA decision tree using single or double DAIR as the treatment strategy for acute PJI was constructed. Quality-adjusted life years and costs associated with the two treatment arms were calculated. Treatment success rates, failure rates, and mortality rates were derived from the literature. Medical costs were derived from both the literature and Medicare data. A cost-effectiveness plane was constructed from multiple Monte Carlo trials. A sensitivity analysis identified parameters most influencing the optimal strategy decision.ResultsDouble DAIR was the optimal treatment strategy both in terms of the health utility state (82% of trials) and medical cost (97% of trials). Strategy tables demonstrated that as long as the success rate of double debridement is 10% or greater than the success rate of a single debridement, the two-stage protocol is cost-effective.ConclusionsA double DAIR protocol is more cost-effective than single DAIR from a societal perspective.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call