PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 19, 2024Orthopaedic Proceedings0 citations

The Association of Bearing Surface Materials With the Risk of Revision Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Cohort Analysis of 1,026,481 Hip Arthroplasties From the National Joint Registry

View Full Paper
MWMichael R. WhitehouseRPRita PatelJFJonathan French

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

We investigated the revision rates of primary total hip replacement (THR) reported in the National Joint Registry (NJR) by types of bearing surfaces used. We analysed THR procedures across all orthopaedic units in England and Wales. Our analyses estimated all-cause and cause-specific revision rates. We identified primary THRs with heads and monobloc cups or modular acetabular component THRs with head and shell/liner combinations. We used flexible parametric survival models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR). A total of 1,026,481 primary THRs performed between 2003–2019 are included in the primary analysis (Monobloc: n=378,979 and Modular: n=647,502) with 20,869 (2%) of these primary THRs subsequently undergoing a revision episode (Monobloc: n=7,381 and Modular: n=13,488). Compared to implants with a cobalt chrome head and highly crosslinked polyethylene (HCLPE) cup, the all-cause risk of revision for monobloc acetabular implant was higher for patients with cobalt chrome or stainless steel head and non-HCLPE cup. The risk of revision was lower for patients with a delta ceramic head and HCLPE cup implant, at any post-operative period. Compared to patients with a cobalt chrome head and HCLPE liner primary THR, the all-cause risk of revision for modular acetabular implant varied non-constantly. THRs with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and HCLPE liner had a lower risk of revision throughout the entire post-operative period. The all-cause and indication-specific risk of prosthesis revision, at different time points following the initial implantation, is lower for implants with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and a HCLPE liner/cup than commonly used alternatives such as cobalt chrome heads and HCLPE liner/cup.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Whitehouse et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e5bc3fb6db643587554730https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992x.2024.16.061
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1BEARING SURFACE MATERIALS AND THE RISK OF REVISION FOLLOWING PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: A COHORT ANALYSIS OF 1,026,481 HIP ARTHROPLASTIES FROM THE NATIONAL JOINT REGISTRY2024
  2. 2ESTIMATING THE COSTS, HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE, AND REVISION RISK IN THE YEAR AFTER ELECTIVE PRIMARY AND REVISION HIP ARTHROPLASTY PROCEDURES BY IMPLANT BEARING MATERIALS: AN ANALYSIS OF LINKED DATA FROM THE NATIONAL JOINT REGISTRY (NJR), HOSPITAL EPISODE STATISTICS (HES), AND PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES (PROMS) FOR ENGLISH PATIENTS2024
  3. 3CAUSES AND RISK FACTORS IN PRIMARY TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT LEADING TO REVISION SURGERY2025
  4. 4The association between implant design, age, sex and the rate of major reoperation in patients undergoing primary total hip replacement: A retrospective study of UK National Joint Registry and Hospital Episodes Statistics data2025 · 2 citations
  5. 5FIRST REVISION TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY FOR INSTABILITY: TEN-YEAR OUTCOMES AND RISK FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH RE-REVISION2026