Association of Drain Use in Ankle Arthrodesis With Increased Blood Transfusion Risk: A National Observational Study.
arthrodesis
arthroplasty
drains
outcome
Journal
Foot & ankle orthopaedics
ISSN: 2473-0114
Titre abrégé: Foot Ankle Orthop
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101752333
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2022
Jul 2022
Historique:
entrez:
2
9
2022
pubmed:
3
9
2022
medline:
3
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Closed wound drainage has been extensively studied in the hip and knee arthroplasty literature with equivocal results on its clinical benefits. Although also used in orthopaedic surgeries like ankle arthrodesis and ankle arthroplasty, large-scale data are currently lacking on utilization patterns and real-world effectiveness. We, therefore, aimed to address this research gap in this distinct surgical cohort using national claims data. Using the Premier Healthcare claims database from 2006 to 2016, ankle arthrodesis (n=10,085) and ankle arthroplasty (n=4,977) procedures were included. The main effect was drain use, defined by detailed billing descriptions. Outcomes included blood transfusion, 90-day readmission, and length and cost of hospitalization. Mixed-effects models measured associations between drain use and outcomes. Odds ratios (OR, or % change), 95% CIs, and Overall, drains were used in 11% (n=1,074) and 15% (n=755) of ankle arthrodesis and ankle arthroplasty procedures, respectively. Drain use dramatically decreased over the years in both surgery types: from 14% to 6% and 24% to 7% between 2006 and 2016, for arthrodesis and ankle arthroplasty procedures, respectively. After adjustment for relevant covariates, drain use was associated with increased odds of blood transfusion in ankle arthrodesis surgery (OR 1.4, CI 1.1-1.8, This is the first national study on drain use in ankle surgery. We found a decrease in use over time. Drain use was associated with higher odds of blood transfusion in ankle arthrodesis patients. Although this negative effect may be mitigated by the rapidly decreasing use of drains, future studies are needed to discern drivers of drain use in this distinct surgical population. Level III, retrospective cohort study.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Closed wound drainage has been extensively studied in the hip and knee arthroplasty literature with equivocal results on its clinical benefits. Although also used in orthopaedic surgeries like ankle arthrodesis and ankle arthroplasty, large-scale data are currently lacking on utilization patterns and real-world effectiveness. We, therefore, aimed to address this research gap in this distinct surgical cohort using national claims data.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Using the Premier Healthcare claims database from 2006 to 2016, ankle arthrodesis (n=10,085) and ankle arthroplasty (n=4,977) procedures were included. The main effect was drain use, defined by detailed billing descriptions. Outcomes included blood transfusion, 90-day readmission, and length and cost of hospitalization. Mixed-effects models measured associations between drain use and outcomes. Odds ratios (OR, or % change), 95% CIs, and
Results
UNASSIGNED
Overall, drains were used in 11% (n=1,074) and 15% (n=755) of ankle arthrodesis and ankle arthroplasty procedures, respectively. Drain use dramatically decreased over the years in both surgery types: from 14% to 6% and 24% to 7% between 2006 and 2016, for arthrodesis and ankle arthroplasty procedures, respectively. After adjustment for relevant covariates, drain use was associated with increased odds of blood transfusion in ankle arthrodesis surgery (OR 1.4, CI 1.1-1.8,
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
This is the first national study on drain use in ankle surgery. We found a decrease in use over time. Drain use was associated with higher odds of blood transfusion in ankle arthrodesis patients. Although this negative effect may be mitigated by the rapidly decreasing use of drains, future studies are needed to discern drivers of drain use in this distinct surgical population.
Level of Evidence
UNASSIGNED
Level III, retrospective cohort study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36051863
doi: 10.1177/24730114221119735
pii: 10.1177_24730114221119735
pmc: PMC9424893
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
24730114221119735Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. ICMJE forms for all authors are available online.
Références
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 May 16;12:68
pubmed: 22591115
J Arthroplasty. 2016 Sep;31(9):1954-8
pubmed: 27062352
Epidemiology. 2000 Nov;11(6):684-8
pubmed: 11055630
EGEMS (Wash DC). 2014 Nov 11;2(1):1110
pubmed: 25848597
J Arthroplasty. 2014 May;29(5):895-9
pubmed: 24360337
J Knee Surg. 2018 Aug;31(7):594-599
pubmed: 29727870
Foot Ankle Int. 2022 Jun 20;:10711007221099197
pubmed: 35723260
Med Care. 2005 Nov;43(11):1130-9
pubmed: 16224307
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019 Jul;477(7):1750-1755
pubmed: 31107313
J Arthroplasty. 2016 Mar;31(3):641-5
pubmed: 26631284
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1961 Oct;43-A:939-46
pubmed: 14040185
Acta Orthop. 2014 Dec;85(6):548-55
pubmed: 25285615
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 Jun;466(6):1363-7
pubmed: 18421541
Clin Ther. 2001 Mar;23(3):481-98
pubmed: 11318082
Ann Surg. 1970 May;171(5):764-9
pubmed: 5445663
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18;(3):CD001825
pubmed: 17636687
Foot Ankle Orthop. 2020 Dec 16;5(4):2473011420975419
pubmed: 35097417
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Jun;86(6):1146-52
pubmed: 15173286
Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2018 Jan;6(1):47-51
pubmed: 29430495
Orthopedics. 2019 Jan 1;42(1):e29-e31
pubmed: 30403827
Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Sep;41(9):1117-1121
pubmed: 32659136
Foot Ankle Int. 2015 Apr;36(4):360-8
pubmed: 25358807
Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1993;82(1):51-4
pubmed: 8323238
Int Orthop. 2016 Dec;40(12):2505-2509
pubmed: 27290896
Multivariate Behav Res. 2011 May;46(3):399-424
pubmed: 21818162
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014 Aug;24(6):939-46
pubmed: 23917702
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 Nov;87(11):1465-7
pubmed: 16260659
J Arthroplasty. 2011 Dec;26(8):1265-72
pubmed: 21371856