Nin Darren Z, Chen Ya-Wen, Mandalia Krishna, Parman Michael, Shah Sarav S, Ramappa Arun J, Chang David C, Matzkin Elizabeth G
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2024 Jul 29;12(7):23259671241257881. doi: 10.1177/23259671241257881. eCollection 2024 Jul.
Treatment strategies for meniscal tears range from nonoperative management to surgical intervention. However, national trends in cost-related outcomes and patient factors related to the failure of nonoperative management remain poorly understood.
To describe the costs associated with nonoperative versus operative management of meniscal tears in the 2 years after diagnosis and examine the relationship between patient characteristics and timing of surgery.
Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.
This study was conducted using the MarketScan databases. Patients diagnosed with a meniscal tear without concomitant knee osteoarthritis between January 1 and December 31, 2017, were included. The primary outcome was the total cost of meniscal tear-related procedures-including insurance deductibles, coinsurance, and net insurance payments-in the 2 years after diagnosis. Procedures included were as follows: (1) surgery-including meniscectomy or meniscal repair; (2) physical therapy; (3) medication-including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, opioids, and acetaminophen; (4) intra-articular injections-including professional fee, hyaluronic acid, and corticosteroids; (5) imaging; and (6) clinic visits to orthopaedic specialists. Patients were grouped as having undergone early surgery (ES) (≤3 months of diagnosis), late surgery (LS) (>3 months after diagnosis), or no surgery (NS). Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the likelihood of undergoing surgery early and failing nonoperative treatment.
The study population included 29,924 patients with a mean age of 43.9 ± 12.9 years (ES: n = 9507 (31.8%); LS: n = 2021 (6.8%); NS: n = 18,396 (61.5%)). Complex (36.6%) and medial (58.8%) meniscal tears were the most common type and location of injuries, respectively. The mean cost of management per patient was $3835 ± $4795. Costs were lower in the NS group ($1905 ± $3175) compared with the ES group ($6759 ± $5155), while the highest costs were observed in the LS group ($7649 ± $5913) ( < .001). Patients who were men, >40 years, and with a bucket-handle or lateral meniscal tear were more likely to undergo surgery early. Patients who were men, <30 years, and with a complex tear or tear to the lateral meniscus were more likely to fail nonoperative management.
Nonoperative management had the lowest cost burden and should be recommended for patients with appropriate indications. However, if surgery is necessary, it should be performed earlier.
半月板撕裂的治疗策略涵盖从非手术治疗到手术干预。然而,与成本相关的结果的全国趋势以及与非手术治疗失败相关的患者因素仍知之甚少。
描述诊断后2年内半月板撕裂非手术治疗与手术治疗的相关成本,并研究患者特征与手术时机之间的关系。
横断面研究;证据等级,3级。
本研究使用MarketScan数据库。纳入2017年1月1日至12月31日期间诊断为半月板撕裂且无膝关节骨关节炎的患者。主要结局是诊断后2年内与半月板撕裂相关的手术总成本,包括保险免赔额、共付额和保险净支付额。包括的手术如下:(1)手术,包括半月板切除术或半月板修复术;(2)物理治疗;(3)药物治疗,包括非甾体类抗炎药、阿片类药物和对乙酰氨基酚;(4)关节内注射,包括专业费用、透明质酸和皮质类固醇;(5)影像学检查;(6)骨科专家门诊就诊。患者分为接受早期手术(ES)(诊断后≤3个月)、晚期手术(LS)(诊断后>3个月)或未手术(NS)。进行多因素逻辑回归以确定早期手术和非手术治疗失败的可能性。
研究人群包括29924例患者,平均年龄43.9±12.9岁(ES组:n = 9507例(31.8%);LS组:n = 2021例(6.8%);NS组:n = 18396例(61.5%))。复杂半月板撕裂(36.6%)和内侧半月板撕裂(58.8%)分别是最常见的损伤类型和部位。每位患者的平均治疗成本为3835±4795美元。与ES组(6759±5155美元)相比,NS组成本较低(1905±3175美元),而LS组成本最高(7649±5913美元)(P <.001)。男性、年龄>40岁、桶柄状或外侧半月板撕裂的患者更有可能早期接受手术。男性、年龄<30岁、复杂撕裂或外侧半月板撕裂的患者更有可能非手术治疗失败。
非手术治疗成本负担最低,对于有适当指征的患者应推荐。然而,如果需要手术,应尽早进行。