These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Cost Analysis of Ceramic Heads in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.
    Author: Carnes KJ, Odum SM, Troyer JL, Fehring TK.
    Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2016 Nov 02; 98(21):1794-1800. PubMed ID: 27807111.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The advent of adverse local tissue reactions seen in metal-on-metal bearings, and the recent recognition of trunnionosis, have led many surgeons to recommend ceramic-on-polyethylene articulations for primary total hip arthroplasty. However, to our knowledge, there has been little research that has considered whether the increased cost of ceramic provides enough benefit over cobalt-chromium to justify its use. The primary purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of ceramic-on-polyethylene implants and metal-on-polyethylene implants in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: Markov decision modeling was used to determine the ceramic-on-polyethylene implant revision rate necessary to be cost-effective compared with the revision rate of metal-on-polyethylene implants across a range of patient ages and implant costs. A different set of Markov models was used to estimate the national cost burden of choosing ceramic-on-polyethylene implants over metal-on-polyethylene implants for primary total hip arthroplasties. The Premier Research Database was used to identify 20,398 patients who in 2012 were ≥45 years of age and underwent a total hip arthroplasty with either a ceramic-on-polyethylene implant or a metal-on-polyethylene implant. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness of ceramic heads is highly dependent on the cost differential between ceramic and metal femoral heads and the age of the patient. At a cost differential of $325, ceramic-on-polyethylene bearings are cost-effective for patients <85 years of age. At a cost differential of $600, it is cost-effective to utilize ceramic-on-polyethylene bearings in patients <65 years of age, and, at a differential of $1,003, ceramic-on-polyethylene bearings are not cost-effective at any age. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to recoup the initial increased expenditure of ceramic heads through a diminished lifetime revision cost is dependent on the price premium for ceramic and the age of the patient. A wholesale switch to ceramic bearings regardless of age or cost differential may result in an economic burden to the health system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and decision analysis, Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]