Intra-wound vancomycin powder is cost-saving in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE

This study seeks to explore whether intra-wound vancomycin powder (IVP) is a cost-effective adjunct to standard of care (SOC) in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) from a US payor perspective.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model in the form of a decision tree was developed to compare the cost and outcomes of IVP with those of SOC in preventing periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) in TJA patients. The base case analysis assumes a hypothetical practice with an equal volume (50/50) of THA and TKA procedures in both the IVP + SOC and the SOC arm. Cost and clinical effectiveness data were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity and threshold analyses were used to estimate how changing inputs would impact the cost-effectiveness of IVP.

RESULTS

Deterministic results found that in the base case model, IVP as an adjunct to SOC generates a cost saving of $260.38/patient. In scenario analysis, where THA and TKA procedures were separated, the estimated cost saving was $241.50/patient and $279.27/patient, respectively. Break-even analysis showed that the cost of IVP per patient would need to be $244.82-$282.59, or the PJI relative risk (RR) be approximately 0.99. Probabilistic analysis found IVP + SOC was cost-saving in 99.26% of the 10,000 iterations in the base case model.

CONCLUSION

Applying local vancomycin as an adjunct to SOC in primary TJA is not just cost effective, but cost-saving in reducing PJIs, saving an average of $260.38/patient. Depending on individual institution/practice infection rates and revision surgery costs, local vancomycin administration for primary TJA should be considered.