Can Robot-Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Be Cost-Effective? A Markov Decision Analysis

被引:125
作者
Moschetti, Wayne E. [1 ]
Konopka, Joseph F. [2 ]
Rubash, Harry E. [2 ]
Genuario, James W. [3 ]
机构
[1] Dartmouth Hitchcock Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Lebanon, NH 03766 USA
[2] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Orthoped Surg, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[3] Steadman Hawkins Clin, Denver, CO USA
关键词
unicompartmental arthroplasty; robotic assistance; cost; economic analysis; cost-effectiveness; REPLACEMENT; REVISION; HEALTH; OSTEOARTHRITIS; PROSTHESIS; OUTCOMES; REGISTRY;
D O I
10.1016/j.arth.2015.10.018
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
100224 [整形外科学];
摘要
Background: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a treatment option for single-compartment knee osteoarthritis. Robotic assistance may improve survival rates of UKA, but the cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted UKA is unknown. The purpose of this study was to delineate the revision rate, hospital volume, and robotic system costs for which this technology would be cost-effective. Methods: We created a Markov decision analysis to evaluate the costs, outcomes, and incremental cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted UKA in 64-year-old patients with end-stage unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis. Results: Robot-assisted UKA was more costly than traditional UKA, but offered a slightly better outcome with 0.06 additional quality-adjusted life-years at an incremental cost of $47,180 per quality-adjusted life-years, given a case volume of 100 cases annually. The system was cost-effective when case volume exceeded 94 cases per year, 2-year failure rates were below 1.2%, and total system costs were <$1.426 million. Conclusion: Robot-assisted UKA is cost-effective compared with traditional UKA when annual case volume exceeds 94 cases per year. It is not cost-effective at low-volume or medium-volume arthroplasty centers. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:759 / 765
页数:7
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]
Unicompartmental or total knee arthroplasty? Results from a matched study [J].
Amin, Anish K. ;
Patton, James T. ;
Cook, Robert E. ;
Gaston, Mark ;
Brenkel, Ivan J. .
CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2006, (451) :101-106
[2]
Long-term Results With a Lateral Unicondylar Replacement [J].
Argenson, Jean-Noel A. ;
Parratte, Sebastien ;
Bertani, Antoine ;
Flecher, Xavier ;
Aubaniac, Jean-Manuel .
CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2008, 466 (11) :2686-2693
[3]
Modern Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with Cement [J].
Argenson, Jean-Noel A. ;
Blanc, Guillaume ;
Aubaniac, Jean-Manuel ;
Parratte, Sebastien .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2013, 95A (10) :905-909
[4]
Bergen H., 2010, NORWEGIAN ARTHOPLAST
[5]
Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up [J].
Berger, RA ;
Meneghini, RM ;
Jacobs, JJ ;
Sheinkop, MB ;
Della Valle, CJ ;
Rosenberg, AG ;
Galante, JO .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2005, 87A (05) :999-1006
[6]
Unicompartmental knee replacement [J].
Bert, JM .
ORTHOPEDIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2005, 36 (04) :513-+
[7]
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty 11-year experience from 3929 implants in RIPO register [J].
Bordini, Barbara ;
Stea, Susanna ;
Falcioni, Stefano ;
Ancarani, Cristina ;
Toni, Aldo .
KNEE, 2014, 21 (06) :1275-1279
[8]
Cost-utility analyses in orthopaedic surgery [J].
Brauer, CA ;
Rosen, AB ;
Olchanski, NV ;
Neumann, PJ .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2005, 87A (06) :1253-1259
[9]
Revision of failed unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement [J].
Chou, Daud T. S. ;
Swamy, Girish N. ;
Lewis, James R. ;
Badhe, Nitin P. .
KNEE, 2012, 19 (04) :356-359
[10]
Medium-term results of Oxford phase-3 medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty [J].
Clement, Nicholas David ;
Duckworth, Andrew David ;
MacKenzie, Sam Peter ;
Nie, Yuan Xin ;
Tiemessen, Christopher Henricus .
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2012, 20 (02) :157-161