Access to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is sometimes restricted for patients with severe obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2). This study compares the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) associated with TKA in patients with a BMI above and below 40 kg/m2 to examine whether this is supported. This single-centre study compared 169 consecutive patients with severe obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) (mean age 65.2 years (40 to 87); mean BMI 44.2 kg/m2 (40 to 66); 129/169 female) undergoing unilateral TKA to a propensity score matched (age, sex, preoperative Oxford Knee Score (OKS)) cohort with a BMI < 40 kg/m2 in a 1:1 ratio. Demographic data, comorbidities, and complications to one year were recorded. Preoperative and one-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were completed: EuroQol five-dimension three-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), OKS, pain, and satisfaction. Using national life expectancy data with obesity correction and the 2020 NHS National Tariff, QALYs (discounted at 3.5%), and direct medical costs accrued over a patient’s lifetime, were calculated. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was used to model variation in cost/QALY for each cohort across 1,000 simulations.Aims
Methods
Before proceeding to longer-term studies, we have studied the early clinical results of a new mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis in comparison with an established fixed-bearing device. Patients requiring bilateral knee replacement consented to have their operations under one anaesthetic using one of each prosthesis. They also agreed to accept the random choice of knee (right or left) and to remain ignorant as to which side had which implant. Outcomes were measured using the American Knee Society Score (AKSS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and determination of the range of movement and pain scores before and at one year after operation. Preoperatively, there was no systematic difference between the right and left knees. One patient died in the perioperative period and one mobile-bearing prosthesis required early revision for dislocation of the meniscal component. At one year the mean AKSS, OKS and pain scores for the new device were slightly better (p <
0.025) than those for the fixed-bearing device. There was no difference in the range of movement. We believe that this is the first controlled, blinded trial to compare early function of a new knee prosthesis with that of a standard implant. It demonstrates a small but significant clinical advantage for the mobile-bearing design.
