Cost Analysis of Routine Histopathologic Evaluation of Specimens Following Total Ankle Arthroplasty

Abstract

Background: Routine histopathologic examination of orthopaedic surgical specimens is a standard practice at many institutions. Previous studies have demonstrated that this practice seldom altered patient management for several orthopaedic procedures. As a result, the value of such practices has come into question. The purpose of this study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of routine histopathologic analysis of specimens obtained during total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent uncomplicated primary TAA at a large, academic, health system between January 2015 and December 2021. The postoperative histopathologic diagnoses were compared with the respective patient’s preoperative clinical and intraoperative diagnoses. The prevalence of concordant, discrepant, and discordant diagnoses was determined. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to assess the financial implications of obtaining routine specimens for histopathologic examination for TAA. Results: A total of 85 TAAs were identified in 85 individual patients and were included in the present study. A total of 172 specimens were sent for routine histopathologic review. On histopathologic analysis, a final diagnosis was confirmed in 82 (96.5%) of the total specimens reviewed. A discrepant diagnosis was discovered in 3 (3.5%; 2 cases of gout/pseudogout and 1 case of osteonecrosis) cases and 0 (0%) discordant diagnoses were discovered, corresponding to positive and negative predictive values of 97% and 100%, respectively The total estimate of costs incurred for the routine analysis of all specimens included in the study was between $12 299.20 and 17 846.00. The estimated cost to establish each discrepant diagnosis ranged between $4099.73 and $5948.67, and the cost for a discordant diagnosis was unable to be established. Conclusion: Routine histopathologic analysis of specimens obtained during TAA rarely revealed a discordant diagnosis and resulted in no alterations to patients’ plan of care. Furthermore, the additional costs of routine histopathologic examination are significant. As such, it is recommended that such interventions in TAA should be performed on a per-case basis at the operating surgeon’s discretion.