Goulding, Krista

ABSTRACTBackground and ObjectivesMedicaid reimbursement to physicians has been demonstrated to be lower than reimbursement from Medicare and private insurance. Studies on Medicaid reimbursement for orthopedic oncology procedures, however, are limited. This study compares Medicaid reimbursement rates to Medicare for 38 common musculoskeletal oncology procedures and assesses variability among states.MethodsWe collected 38 current procedural terminology (CPT) codes for commonly performed orthopedic oncology procedures. Medicare rates were obtained from the 2023 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid physician (CMS) fee schedule. Medicaid rates were collected from electronic state website fee schedules. Reimbursement for the two insurance types were compared with state and national averages. Dollar differences were adjusted for work relative value units (RVU) to ascertain procedural variability. The Medicare Wage Index, representing differences in wages across states, was used to adjust medicaid rates to compare more accurately to medicare. Coefficient of variation values, calculated by dividing the standard deviation by the mean, were calculated to assess variation among procedures.ResultsMedicaid reimbursed orthopedic oncologists 22.1% less than medicare on average, increasing to 33.0% when adjusting for wage differences. State Medicaid reimbursement ranged from 37% to 131% of Medicare, with 38 states reimbursing less than Medicare on average. The coefficient of variation for Medicaid procedures ranged from 0.24 to 0.46, indicating wide variability among states and procedures, while for Medicare, the coefficient of variation was low at 0.06 to 0.07.ConclusionsMedicaid reimbursement for common orthopedic oncology procedures is substantially lower and more variable than Medicare, despite the often urgent nature of these surgeries. Disparities in reimbursement may impact access to care for this population, highlighting the need for policy reform.

Abstract Background Radiation‐associated soft tissue sarcomas (RA‐STS) are rare complications of patients receiving radiation therapy (RT) and are generally associated with a poor prognosis. Most of the literature surrounding RA‐STS of the chest is centered on angiosarcoma. Therefore, we aim to document the management and outcome of patients with non‐angiosarcoma RA‐STS of the chest. Methods We reviewed 17 patients (all female, median age 65 years) diagnosed with RA‐STS. The most common primary malignancy was breast carcinoma ( n = 15), with a median RT dose of 57.9 Gy. All patients underwent surgical resection; five patients (29%) received radiotherapy; and five patients (29%) received peri‐operative chemotherapy. Results The 5‐year local recurrence and metastatic‐free survival were 61% and 60%, while the 5‐year disease‐specific survival was 53%. Local recurrence was associated with death due to disease (HR 9.06, p = 0.01). Complications occurred in nine of patients, most commonly due to a wound complication ( n = 7). At the most recent follow‐up, the median Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score was 63%. Conclusion RA‐STS involving the chest wall are aggressive tumors with a high risk of local relapse and death due to disease. Local recurrence was associated with death due to disease; as such, we recommend aggressive surgical management with evaluation for adjuvant therapies.

AbstractIntroductionTranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic drug that has been shown to reduce blood loss following surgery. The use of TXA during orthopedic procedures has gained widespread acceptance, with multiple clinical studies demonstrating no increase in thrombotic complications. While TXA has been shown to be safe and effective for several orthopedic procedures, its use in orthopedic sarcoma surgery is not well established. Cancer‐associated thrombosis remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with sarcoma. It is unknown if intraoperative TXA use will increase the risk of developing a postoperative thrombotic complication in this population. This study aimed to compare the risk of postoperative thrombotic complications in patients who received TXA during sarcoma resection to patients who did not receive TXA.MethodsA retrospective review was performed of 1099 patients who underwent resection of a soft tissue or bone sarcoma at our institution between 2010 and 2021. Baseline demographics and postoperative outcomes were compared between patients who did and did not receive intraoperative TXA. We evaluated 90‐day complication rates, including: deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and mortality.ResultsTXA was used more commonly for bone tumors (p < 0.001), tumors located in the pelvis (p = 0.004), and larger tumors (p < 0.001). Patients who received intraoperative TXA were associated with a significant increase in developing a postoperative DVT (odds ratio [OR]: 2.22, p = 0.036) and PE (OR: 4.62, p < 0.001), but had no increase in CVA, MI, or mortality (all p > 0.05) within 90 days of surgery, following univariate analysis. Multivariable analysis confirmed that TXA was independently associated with developing a postoperative PE (OR: 10.64, 95% confidence interval: 2.23–50.86, p = 0.003). We found no association with DVT, MI, CVA, or mortality within 90 days postoperatively, following intraoperative TXA use.ConclusionOur results demonstrate a higher associated risk of PE following TXA use in sarcoma surgery and caution is warranted with TXA use in this patient population.